What is Vodafone Essar Cellular v. ACIT authority for?

Discount paid to distributors on prepaid cards constitutes 'commission' for the purpose of TDS under Section 194H. Consequently, failure to deduct TDS makes the assessee liable under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A).

How many judgments cite Vodafone Essar Cellular v. ACIT?

44 judgments on BharatTax cite Vodafone Essar Cellular v. ACIT (194 Taxmann 518), spanning 2016 to 2023.

Vodafone Essar Cellular v. ACIT (194 Taxmann 518)

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah) Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3874/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit, 8(3)(1) Vs. M/S Tata Teleservices Room No. 615, 6Th Floor (Mah.) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, D-26, Ttc Industrial Mk Road, Mumbai Estate, Midc 400020. Sanpada, Navi Mumbai – 4000703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1458C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Vinay Sinha.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Hiten Chande.Ar Date Of Hearing 04.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Vinay Sinha.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Hiten Chande.AR

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 32Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT, 8(3)(1) Vs. M/s Tata Teleservices Room No. 615, 6th Floor (Mah.) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, D-26, TTC Industrial MK Road, Mumbai Estate, MIDC 400020. Sanpada, Navi Mumbai – 4000703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACH1458C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Mr.Vinay Sinha.DR Respondent by : Mr.Hiten Chande.AR Date of Hearing 04.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The revenue has filed the appeal against the…

Aditya Mohapatra, Dhenkanal vs. Principal CIT-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/CTK/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.155/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Sri Aditya Mohapatra, Vs. Pr.Cit-2, Bhubaneswar Prop.: Orissa Motors, Kujakanta, Main Road, Dhenkanal. Pan No. : Aaacl 6593 N (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Damodar Pati, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam,Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/09/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Revisionary Order Passed U/S.263 Of The Act By The Pr.Cit-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 21.03.2016 For The A.Y.2012-2013. 2. Earlier This Appeal Was Disposed Off By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 29.08.2017. Thereafter The Assessee Challenged The Order Of The Tribunal Before The Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Order Dated 21.03.2018 Passed In W.P.(C)No.22608 Of 2017 Set Aside The Order Of The Tribunal To Pass Fresh Order Directing The Assessee To File The Documents As He Wants. Accordingly, The Appeal Of The Assessee Restored To Its Original Number & Finally Heard With The Consent Of Both The Parties.

For Appellant: Shri Damodar Pati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 194HSection 263Section 40

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.155/CTK/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Sri Aditya Mohapatra, Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar Prop.: Orissa Motors, Kujakanta, Main Road, Dhenkanal. PAN No. : AAACL 6593 N (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Damodar Pati, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam,CIT DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 26/08/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/09/2020 आदेश / O R…

DCIT 8 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah.) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2012-2013

ITA 1059/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Chande (AR)For Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (CIT)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 & Assessment Year: 2013-2014 The Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s Tata Teleservices Tax- 8(3)(1), (Mah.) Ltd., Room No. 615, 6th Floor, D-26, TTC Industrial Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Estate, MIDC Sanpada, Mumbai - 400020 Navi Mumbai - 400703 PAN: AAACH1458C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (CIT) Assessee by : Shri Hiten Chande (AR) Date of Hearing: 29/01/2020 Date of Pronouncement: 31/01/2020 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM These appe…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS) 1(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3785/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No. 3785/Mum/2016 For (Assessment Year 2012-13) M/S. Vodafone Idea Ltd. Ito (Tds)-1(2)(4), (Formerly Known As Idea 803, K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Cellular Ltd.), Skyline Icon, Vs. Hospital Building, 1St Floor, 86/92 Andheri Kurla Charni Road (W), Road, Marol Naka, Andheri Mumbai-400002. (E), Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aaacb2100P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi with Shri C.D. Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja CIT-DR with Shri V.K. Agarwal ( Sr DR)

Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3785/Mum/2016 for (Assessment Year 2012-13) M/s. Vodafone Idea Ltd. ITO (TDS)-1(2)(4), (Formerly known as Idea 803, K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Cellular Ltd.), Skyline Icon, Vs. Hospital Building, 1st Floor, 86/92 Andheri Kurla Charni Road (W), Road, Marol Naka, Andheri Mumbai-400002. (E), Mumbai-400059. PAN: AAACB2100P Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Ronak Doshi with Shri C.D. Joshi (AR) Respondent by : Shri S. Padmaja CIT-DR with Shri V.K. Agarwal ( Sr DR) Date…

Sh.Anil Dhiwan S/O Sh.A.K.Dhwan vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Mandi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1298/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptash.Anil Dhawan, S/O Sh.A.K.Dhawan, Vs. The D.C.I.T., Moti Bazar, Mandi, Distt. Mandi (H.P.) Circle-Mandi (H.P.) Pan: Aejpd7188M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR

Section 194Section 194HSection 250(6)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sh.Anil Dhawan, S/o Sh.A.K.Dhawan, Vs. The D.C.I.T., Moti Bazar, Mandi, Distt. Mandi (H.P.) Circle-Mandi (H.P.) PAN: AEJPD7188M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : S/Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA & Aditya Kumar, CA Respondent by : Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT, DR Date of hearing :28.03.2018 / 17.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17/07/2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ITO TDS-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 340/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

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

…ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s Idea Cellular Ltd.(2010) 325 ITR 148(Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of M/s Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,(2010) 235 ITR 393 (Ker), wherein it was held that the discount given by the assessee to the distributors on prepaid cards was commission within the meaning of Explanation-1 to section 194H of the Act. 10. The Ld. counsel for assessee stated that since then the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s Bharti…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 217/CHANDI/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

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

…ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s Idea Cellular Ltd.(2010) 325 ITR 148(Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of M/s Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,(2010) 235 ITR 393 (Ker), wherein it was held that the discount given by the assessee to the distributors on prepaid cards was commission within the meaning of Explanation-1 to section 194H of the Act. 10. The Ld. counsel for assessee stated that since then the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s Bharti…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 216/CHANDI/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

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

…ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s Idea Cellular Ltd.(2010) 325 ITR 148(Del) and the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of M/s Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,(2010) 235 ITR 393 (Ker), wherein it was held that the discount given by the assessee to the distributors on prepaid cards was commission within the meaning of Explanation-1 to section 194H of the Act. 10. The Ld. counsel for assessee stated that since then the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s Bharti…

Smt. Sarla Gupta, Jagdalpur (Cg) vs. I.T.O., Jagdalpur (Cg)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years

ITA 110/BIL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Sarla Gupta, The Income Tax Officer, W/O Late Mukesh Gupta, Aayakar Bhawan, Prop. M/S Electronics Traders, Behind Jhankar Tlkies, Vadhera Complex, Vs. Civil Lines, Jagdalpur (C.G.) Jagdalpaur (C.G.) Pan: Adcpg9930C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.R. Rao (Advocate) Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/05/2018

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar (DR)

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Sarla Gupta, The Income Tax Officer, W/o Late Mukesh Gupta, Aayakar Bhawan, Prop. M/s Electronics Traders, Behind Jhankar Tlkies, Vadhera Complex, Vs. Civil Lines, Jagdalpur (C.G.) Jagdalpaur (C.G.) PAN: ADCPG9930C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.R. Rao (Advocate) Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar (DR) Date of Hearing: 09/03/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 25/05/2018 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM These app…

DCIT TDS 1(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Business Channels Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee in both the years are allowed

ITA 7047/MUM/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…considered to be commission so as to subject to TDS under provisions of Section 194H of the Act. 2.10 In my view, the case of the appellant is squarely covered by the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Limited reported at 235 ITR 393. The Kerala High Court has, in paragraph 6, categorically held as under: ........because we have clearly found that the discount paid to the distributors is for service rendered by them and the same amounts to "commission" within the meaning of that term contained under Expln. (i) to s. 194H of the Act. The impugned orders issued under ss. 201(1)…