“interest under section 201(1A)”

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOs filed by the assessee stand dismissed

nwas held liable to pay the amount of Rs. 1,03,54,784 that it had not\ndeducted as TDS, along with interest under section 201(1A) of the Income\nTax Act amounting to Rs. 15,76,567/-\n5.9. Vide Para 168 and 169, Hon'ble SC held that

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

held liable to pay the amount of Rs. 1,03,54,784 that it had not deducted as TDS, along with interest under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act amounting to Rs. 15,76,567/- 5.9. Vide Para 168 and 169, Hon'ble SC held that the amounts

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOs filed by the assessee stand dismissed

nwas held liable to pay the amount of Rs. 1,03,54,784 that it had not\ndeducted as TDS, along with interest under section 201(1A) of the Income\nTax Act amounting to Rs. 15,76,567/-\n5.9. Vide Para 168 and 169, Hon'ble SC held that

DCIT-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. DIEBOLD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the\nCOS filed by the assessee stand dismissed

nwas held liable to pay the amount of Rs. 1,03,54,784 that it had not\ndeducted as TDS, along with interest under section 201(1A) of the Income\nTax Act amounting to Rs. 15,76,567/-\n5.9. Vide Para 168 and 169, Hon'ble SC held that

HEBROS AHL IFMR CAPITAL 2014,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD TDS 1(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankarhebros Ahl Ifmr V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds Ward Capital 2014 बनाम – 1(2)(3) 901, 9Th Floor, Tower-B, Mtnl Telephone Exchange, Peninsula Business Park, Cumballa Hills, Pedder Road, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai – 400026, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400 098, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabth2476G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

declared by them in such ITR, the Appellant could not be regarded as an assessee in default. Ground No 4: Levy of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act The CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in levying interest under section 201(1A

ARCIL SBPS 001 I TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(TDS)-1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokararcil Sbps 001 I Trust Dcit (Tds)-(1)(1), The Ruby, 10Th Floor, 29, Mtnl Building, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Cumballa Hills, Dadar (W), Mumbai- Pedder Road, 400 028 Mumbai-400 026 Pan/Gir No. Aabta3859J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rahul Sarda, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 04.02.2026

deducted under section 194LBC. The Assessing Officer accordingly treated the assessee as an assessee in default under section 201(1) and levied interest under section 201(1A). The computation made by the Assessing Officer was as under: - Surplus as on 31.03.2017: Rs. 3,44,73,676.80/- - TDS @ 30% under section ... 194LBC: Rs. 1,03,42,103.04/- - Interest under section 201(1A): Rs. 13,44,473.40/- Thus, interest demand of Rs. 13,44,473/- was raised. 6. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and the material

ALI FAZAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, with the above directions

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarali Fazal Income Tax Bungalow No.4, Udadhi Officer Tds Ward Tarang Society, Juhu Tara Vs. 1(1)(1) Road, Juhu, Mumbai Room No. 413, 4Th 400049 Floor, Cumbala Hill Mtnl Te Building, Peddar Road, Dr G Deshmukh Marg, Cumbana Hill Mumbai – 400026 Pan/Gir No. Aampf8506G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashish Thakurdesai & Shri Aditya Desai Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. Dr.) Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2026

relevant previous year. The Assessing Officer raised the following demand: Particulars Amount Tax payable under section 201(1) Rs. 1,59,646/- Interest under section 201(1A) Rs. 1,08,559/- Fee under section 234E Rs. 1,59,646/- Total demand Rs. 4,27,851/- 3. The Assessing Officer observed ... that the said Forms 26A have already been verified by the Department and, therefore, the demand under section 201(1) and consequential interest under section 201(1A) in respect of the said two payees deserves to be deleted. 11. With respect to the remaining two payments made to Shri Mustafa

ROYAL WESTERN INDIA TURF CLUB LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD 2(1)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Officer under section\n201(1)/201(1A) of the Act in regard to the demand of Rs.\n12,92,82,401/-including interest under Section 201 (1A) of\nRs. 6,33,09,105/-\n4. That the Assessing Officer has further erred in levying\ninterest under Section 201(1A ... arbitrary and are\nagainst the facts of the case and are not justified by any\nmaterial on record.\n16. That the interest under section 201(1A) of the Act has\nbeen wrongly and illegally charged and the same is highly\nexcessive.\n17. That without prejudice, the interest charged by Assessing

SHETH REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-CC-7(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Arun Khodpiashri Sandeep Singh Karhailsheth Realtors Vasant Oasis, Site Office, Upper Basement, Cts No.345A 1 To 3, 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri (East), ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400059 Pan: Aavfa3975F

informs us that there is no decision which has taken a contrary view.” 13. We further find that the issue whether the interest under section 201(1A) of the Act paid by the assessee was an expenditure incidental to business and allowable as a deduction from the profits and gains

ITO(TDS)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SASHWAT ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the CO is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarincome Tax Officer (Tds) – V/S. Sashwat Energy Private 2(2)(1) बनाम Limited, 3Rd Floor, Mtnl Building, 10Th Floor, Universal Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – Majestic Lokhande Marg, 400 026, Maharashtra Chembur West, Mumbai – 400 043, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Mums95080G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी प्रत्याक्षेपसं./C.O. No.273/Mum/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 4279/Mum/2025) (A.Y. 2021-22) Sashwat Energy Private V/S. Income Tax Officer (Tds) – Limited, बनाम 2(2)(1), 3Rd Floor, Mtnl 10Th Floor, Universal Majestic Building, Cumballa Hill, Lokhande Marg, Chembur Mumbai – 400 026, West, Mumbai – 400 043, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Mums95080G Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

that the assessee company is "an assessee in default" under section 201(1) of the Act and is also liable to pay interest under section 201(1A) of the Act in relation to its failure to deduct tax at source under section 194A of the Act. For the same reasons ... assessee is also held liable for payment of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. P a g e | 10 CO No. 273/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2021-22 Sashwat Energy Private Limited 7.1 Section 201(1) of the Act envisages that where an assessee does not deduct or does