← All Phrases

“Section 201(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 201Section 201(1)1,701 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 201(1) is Kourani v. Union OF India (83 Taxmann.com 137), cited in 1,708 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 201(1)

Kourani v. Union OF India
83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court
1,708
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

Fateh Raj Singhvi & Ors. v. UOI
289 CTR 602 · 2016 · High Court
844
citing judgments

A fee under Section 234E cannot be levied or adjusted in an intimation under Section 200A for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the enabling amendment to Section 200A(1)(c) came into effect only from that date.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 456 · 2010 · Supreme Court
663
citing judgments

Tax must be deducted at source from payments made to a non-resident under Section 195 only if such payment is chargeable to tax in India. The Assessing Officer bears the onus to establish that the payments made are indeed chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
293 ITR 226 · 2007 · Supreme Court
576
citing judgments

The deductor cannot be treated as an assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) if the deductee has already paid the tax or offered the impugned receipts in their return of income. However, interest under Section 201(1A) for delayed deposit of tax can still be levied up to the date of filing of the return of income by the deductee.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India
63 Taxmann.com 243 · 2015 · High Court
397
citing judgments

The imposition of fees for late filing of TDS/TCS returns prior to the Finance Act, 2015 amendments was not illegal, and the Rajasthan High Court found no justification to interfere with such compensatory fees.

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.
377 ITR 635 · 2015 · High Court
369
citing judgments

The second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, is curative and applies retrospectively from April 1, 2005. Consequently, if the recipient of a payment has filed their return and paid taxes on the amount from which tax was not deducted at source, the payer's expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia).

Judgments citing Section 201(1)

Photon Kathaas Production Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS Ward 1(1), Chennai

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.511 & 512/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-2018) Photon Kathaas Production Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.19, Avenue Road, Tds, Ward 1(1) Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aafcp 2805A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Raghav Menon, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri () These Two Appeals Being Ita Nos.511-512/Chny/2024 Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of Even Date 29.12.2023 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Cit(A)’ In Short], Chennai-20 For The Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Common Grounds Of Appeal In Both The Assessment Years, Therefore, For The Sake Of Brevity Grounds Of Appeal Filed In Ita No.511/Chny/2024 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Being Taken As Lead Case & Our Order Thereon Will Mutatis Mutandis Apply To Appeal For Ay 2017-18 Accordingly. Grounds Of Appeal Filed In Ita No.511-512/Chny/2024 Are Reproduced As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. Raghav Menon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl.CIT
Section 133Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

Appeals) was not justified in Rs.87,84,617/- holding that the appellant is to be considered as an 'assessee in default' under section 201(1) and in not quashing the interest charged by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1A). 3 The Learned CIT(Appeals) Ought to have Rs.87 ... Appeals) was not justified in Rs.45,37,296/- holding that the appellant is to be considered as an 'assessee in default' under section 201(1) and in not quashing the interest charged by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1A). 3 The Learned CIT(Appeals) Ought to have Rs.45

Photon Kathaas Production Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS Ward 1-(1), Chennai

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 511/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.511 & 512/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-2018) Photon Kathaas Production Private Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.19, Avenue Road, Tds, Ward 1(1) Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aafcp 2805A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Raghav Menon, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri () These Two Appeals Being Ita Nos.511-512/Chny/2024 Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of Even Date 29.12.2023 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Cit(A)’ In Short], Chennai-20 For The Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Common Grounds Of Appeal In Both The Assessment Years, Therefore, For The Sake Of Brevity Grounds Of Appeal Filed In Ita No.511/Chny/2024 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Being Taken As Lead Case & Our Order Thereon Will Mutatis Mutandis Apply To Appeal For Ay 2017-18 Accordingly. Grounds Of Appeal Filed In Ita No.511-512/Chny/2024 Are Reproduced As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. Raghav Menon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl.CIT
Section 133Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

Appeals) was not justified in Rs.87,84,617/- holding that the appellant is to be considered as an 'assessee in default' under section 201(1) and in not quashing the interest charged by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1A). 3 The Learned CIT(Appeals) Ought to have Rs.87 ... Appeals) was not justified in Rs.45,37,296/- holding that the appellant is to be considered as an 'assessee in default' under section 201(1) and in not quashing the interest charged by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1A). 3 The Learned CIT(Appeals) Ought to have Rs.45

The Dy.DIT, (Intl. Taxn.)- 1, Ahmedabad vs. Vodafone West Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2398/AHD/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2398/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit (International Vodafone West Ltd. बनाम/ Taxation)-1 Vodafone House Ahmedabad Corporate Road V/S. Prahladnagar Off S.G. Highway Ahmedabad-380 051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacf 1190 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-Gandhinagar (Ahmedabad) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 02/06/2014, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Dy.Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation)-1, Ahmedabad (Ao) Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) The Dcit (Intl.Taxn.)-1 Vs. Vodafone West Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Dinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.DR
Section 195(1)Section 201(1)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

Ld.CIT(A)”], dated 02/06/2014, arising out of the assessment order passed by the Dy.Director of Income-tax (International Taxation)-1, Ahmedabad (AO) under section 201(1) & 201(1A) The DCIT (Intl.Taxn.)-1 vs. Vodafone West Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating the issue of computing the tax liability under section 201(1) by applying the provisions of section 195A of the Act and thereby grossing up the payment made by the assessee on the basis that the same is net of taxes