← All Phrases

“Section 155(14)”

Section References (mined)Section 155Section 155(14)8 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 155(14) is R 222 (SC) P.H. Dwivecha vs. CIT Page 84 of 155 53 ITR 261 (SC) Kettlewell Bullen& Co. Ltd. v. CIT (351 ITR 110), cited in 11 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 155(14)

R 222 (SC) P.H. Dwivecha vs. CIT Page 84 of 155 53 ITR 261 (SC) Kettlewell Bullen& Co. Ltd. v. CIT
351 ITR 110 · 2013 · High Court
11
citing judgments

The nature and character of a receipt, whether it is of a capital or revenue nature, depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, particularly the purpose for which the payment was made.

Judgments citing Section 155(14)

Veda Management Consultancy Services, Bangalore vs. ITO, Ward-4(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 144/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soudararajan Kassessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri. Sudharshan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(1)Section 155(14)

assessee to reconcile the same. 4. The learned DR relied on the Order of the lower authorities. The learned DR also referred to section 155(14) of the Act. 5. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that as per submission of the assessee, the income was offered in the relevant

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemptions), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Deendayal Port Authority, Gandhidham

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

ITA 150/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.150/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(14)Section 239Section 263

T.D.S. credit claimed by assessee after filing its Return of income u/s.139 of Income tax Act, 1961, in violation of section 239 and section 155(14) of the Income tax Act, 1961.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was initially assessed under section

Gulf Asia Contracting Co. Pvt. Ltd, Kollam vs. The ACIT Circle 1 (1), Kollam

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 388/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Keshav Dubey, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Gulf Asia Contracting Company Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Xxv/812 Srivaldsam, Thevally P.O. Kollam 691009 [Pan: Aaecg1332Q] Vs. Acit, Circle - 1(1) .......... Respondent Aayakar Bavan, Karbala Jn. Kollam 690001 Appellant By: Shri Rajeev, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 155Section 155(14)Section 219

cannot be granted in the absence of any 3 Gulf Asia Contracting Company Pvt. Ltd. application made in terms of provisions of section 155(14) of the Act and, therefore, no interference is called for in the impugned order. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties

DCIT(It) - 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Ebay International Ag, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5705/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit(It)-2(2)(1), Ebay International Ag Room No. 606, 6Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Express Towers, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, G Block, Bkc, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabce 4327 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Pranay Gandhi
Section 119(2)(b)Section 154Section 155(14)

consider the adjudication of the CIT(A) erred not to consider the adjudication of the AO as to the provisions of section 155(14) of the Ac AO as to the provisions of section 155(14) of the Act are not t are not applicable to the assessee

Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Chennai vs. DCIT (International Tax)-1 (1), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 349/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.349/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, Asv Ramana Towers, International Taxation 1(1) 52,Venkatnarayana Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aadcd 3705D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 155(14)

Form 26AS of the appellant. 2.3. The Ld. AO and DRP has erred in law and on facts in applying the proviso to Section 155(14) of the Act and restricting the TDS credit to the appellant 2.4. The Ld.AO and DRP erred in not allowing the taxes actually deducted

Sap Holdings & Leasing Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant of Income Tax 8(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4837/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(14)Section 199

relevant income in its computation of total income, thenthe TDS credit has to be given to the assessee. 6. We noticed that section 155(14) of the Act has prescribed a procedure and time limit for making the claim. The time limit is two years from

Sap Holidings & Leasing Pvt Lted, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 8(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4836/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(14)Section 199

relevant income in its computation of total income, thenthe TDS credit has to be given to the assessee. 6. We noticed that section 155(14) of the Act has prescribed a procedure and time limit for making the claim. The time limit is two years from

Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Chennai vs. DCIT International Taxation -1(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 365/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.365/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Dassault Systems Simulia Corp Dcit C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp, International Taxation-1(1), बनाम/ 7Th Floor, Asv Ramana Towers Chennai. Vs. 52, Venkatnarayana Road, Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcd-3705-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram (Advocate)- Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nandakumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nandakumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 155(14)Section 199

assessment year for which such income is assessable. 1.6. The learned AO and DRP failed to appreciate the fact that proviso to Section 155(14) of the Act is applicable only in cases where the Appellant has not disclosed income in the return of income. Each of the above ground