“credit for TDS”

Eric Keki Dastur, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-53, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

Subsequently, an order u/s.154 was passed on 25.01.2024 rectifying the mistake, pursuant to application for rectification made by the assessee in respect of credit for TDS. Claim of the assessee is that tax payable on the returned income was Rs.1,40,53,995/- against which there was claim of TDS ... return so filed. 3.2. Assessee demonstrated by various corroborative documentary evidences that rent received is net of TDS but the credit for TDS does not appear in Form No.26AS for the year under consideration. From the same tenant, assessee had been receiving rent in the preceding years also, on which

Mr Harish Subbaya Shetty, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(1), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal being infructuous is hereby

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankar

appeal are as under: (1) The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC has erred in Law in by passing an unambiguous Order for Credit of TDS of Rs.1,65,000/- which is totally unjustified and Arbitrary. (2) On the Facts and Circumstances of the Case, The Commissioner of Income ... flat and shop by the appellant during A.Y. 2016-17 have been declared in the return of income correctly. If yes, the credit of TDS amount of Rs. 1,65,000/- may be given in A.Y.2017-18 as reflected in Form 26 AS and the demand raised

Dadiba Kali Pundole, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incomem Tax -17(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

declaring total income of Rs. 29,16,71,424/-. The return was processed under section 143(a) of the Act in which the credit for TDS was allowed for an amount of Rs.76,38,594 as against an amount of Rs.2,31,72,785 as claimed by the assessee ... return of income. The reason for not allowing the credit towards TDS deducted under section 194Q is stated to be that the assessee has not offered the corresponding income as reported in Form-26AS. 3. Aggrieved the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) accepted

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

deducted at source (TDS') On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned DCIT erred in granting credit for TDS of Rs.33,83,093 as against Rs.43,83,437 (as per Form 26AS) claimed by the Appellant, thereby there is a short tax credit of TDS

Aditya Birla Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax - 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

assessment year for which the underlying sum is assessable. 6.3 The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant full credit of TDS of Rs.2,83,97,08,644/-. 7. GROUND NO. VII: NON-GRANTING OF CREDIT OF TDS AMOUNTING ... case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in not granting the credit of TDS amounting to Rs.1,16,80,993/-pertaining to Wealth Management and Distribution (“WMD”) of erstwhile ABMML claimed by the Appellant by way of letter

Hapag Liyod Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanhapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax International Tax 501 Satellite Gazebo, B Wing, 5Th Circle-2(2)(2) Floor, Guru Hargovindji Marg, Room No.1606, 16Th Floor, Air Andheri East, Mumbai-400993 India Building, Nariman Point, Pan – Aaach0979G Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO based on the directions of DRP has erred in not granting credit for TDS to the extent of Rs. 2,61,739. 9. Without prejudice to ground no. 9, on the facts and circumstances of the case ... Appellant prays that the learned AO be directed to grant full credit for TDS and to re-compute its tax liability accordingly. Levy of Interest 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in levying interest

Ntt India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asstt Comm. of Income Tax-14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanntt India Private Vs. Assessment Unit/Nfac/Dcit Limited Circle 15(1)(2), 1701-1704, B Wing, One Mumbai Bkc, Level 17, G-Block, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. C-65, Bandra Mumbai. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051. Pan/Gir No. Aaacd2145G (Applicant) (Respondent)

return of income filed by the Appellant. The Appellant, therefore, prays the Hon'ble Members to direct the learned AO to grant balance credit for TDS of Rs. 22,86,779/-. 4. Ground 4: Penalty Proceedings: The Ld. AO has erred in law in initiating penalty proceedings under section

Milaha Integrated Maritme and Logistics, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) Circle 3(2)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in denying the credit of TDS amounting to Rs 38,95,402 (appearing in Form 26AS of its agent in India) in the impugned order despite the fact that the Appellant ... Centre, Bengaluru (CPC) vide intimation dated 27.09.2019 u/s. 143(1), whereby the nil income reported by the assessee was processed as such. However, credit of TDS claimed by the assessee of Rs.46,66,874/- was denied. Thus, in the return so processed vide said intimation, the total income was determined

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds No

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Crores Ground no 3 & 4. Income from supply of software treated as Royalty - Rs. INR 34.10 Crore Ground no 5 (without prejudice ground) Credit for TDS on accrual basis when the income has been sad to as an actual basis - short TDS of Rs. 5.64 crores Ground