SRL Ranbaxy Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

16 Taxmann.com 343Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#18491 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also reported as

29 SOT 32

Judgments citing SRL Ranbaxy Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

ITO (TDS) 3(4), Mumbai vs. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, these appeals are dismissed for parity of reasons

ITA 5389/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5389/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 5390/मुं/2013 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं. 6519/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं. 6512/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2012-13) आअसं. 6520/मुं/2014 (िन.व.2012-13) Ito (Tds)-3(4), 9Th Floor, Room No. 909, Smt. K.G.M. Ayurvedic Hospital Building, Charni Road, Mumbai-400002. ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Thyrocare Technologies Ltd. D-37/1, Ttc, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400703 Pan: Aaacu0551B ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Abhijeet Chaudhary "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Dr. K. Shivram सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/12/2021 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 16/02/2022

For Appellant: Sh. Abhijeet ChaudharyFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shivram

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…commission or brokerage. (iv) The TSPs i.e. the payers deducts the tax under section 194J of the Act on the payments made to the assessee. To buttress his submissions, the ld. Counsel placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) SRL. Ranbaxy Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 16 Taxmann.com 343 (Del.-Trib.). (ii) Ahmadabad Stamp Vendors Association Vs. Union of India, 257 ITR 202 (Guj.) 6. Per contra, Sh. Abhijeet Chaudhary representing the Department vehemently defended the assessment order and prayed for reversing the 5 आअसं.5389/मुं/2013 & Ors(िन.व.2009-10 & Ors) ITA NO.5389/MUM/2013 & Ors (A.Y.2009-10 & Ors) findings of CIT…

Nn Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1748/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. N N Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, H-475, First Floor, New Circle-18(2), Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AADCN2170J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr.DR Date of hearing 08.01.2020 Date of pronouncement 21.01.2020 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: Aggrieved with order dated 16/01/2017 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment y…

National Cooperative Development Corporation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 4309/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri K.V.S.R. Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 197ASection 40Section 40a

…ng other than what has been specifically stated in the said definition. Therefore, as held by the coordinate benches in a number of cases including SRL Ranbaxy Ltd v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 16 taxmann.com 343 (Delhi - Trib.), Foster's India (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 29 SOT 32 (Pune) (URO), and Ajmer Zila Dugdh Uipadak Sangh.Ltd. v. ITO 12009} 34 SOT 216, principal agent relationship is a sine qua non for invoking the provisions of Section 194H. In the case before us, there is no principal agent relationship between the bank issuing the bank guarantee and the assessee. When bank issues the bank guarantee, on behalf of th…

M/S. Niit Gis Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2513/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, CA and Shri Deepesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 197ASection 40

…ng other than what has been specifically stated in the said definition. Therefore, as held by the coordinate benches in a number of cases including SRL Ranbaxy Ltd v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 16 taxmann.com 343 (Delhi - Trib.), Foster's India (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 29 SOT 32 (Pune) (URO), and Ajmer Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 34 SOT 216, principal agent relationship is a sine qua non for invoking the provisions of Section 194H. In the case before us, there is no principal agent relationship between the bank issuing the bank guarantee and the assessee. When bank issues the bank guarantee, on behalf of th…

ITO (TDS) 3(4), Mumbai vs. Unichem Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4592/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4592/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4593/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ito (Tds) 3(4),10Th Floor, Unichem Laboratories Ltd., Room No. 1011, Unichem Bhawan, S.V.Road, बनाम/ Smt. K.G.M. Ayurvedic Hospital 8, Prabhat Estate, Bulidng, Charni Road, Jogeshwari (West), V. Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai – 400 102. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacu0551B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Airiju Jai Karan(DR)

Section 133ASection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…y of drugs, same are taken back and money refunded. The assessee company relied upon the decisions in the case of the Mother Diary 249 CTR 559 and Jai Drinks Private Limited 336 ITR 363 by Hon’ble Delhi High Court and in the case of Fosters India Private Ltd. 29 SOT 32 and Government Milk Scheme 39 ITD 306 by Pune Tribunal . The assessee company also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ahmadabad Stamp Vendors Association, 25 Taxman.com 201 (SC) (292). The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee company held that the assessee company is manufacturing and selling bulk…