JYOTHY INDUSTRIES ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

TDS credit to the person whose income is chargeable to tax.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961", "Rule 37BA of ITR 1962", "Section 198", "Section 199

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS credit should follow the income, and procedural objections like Form 26AS mismatch should not deny substantive entitlement, especially when the income is offered to tax.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 70", "Section 80G", "Section 143(1)", "Section 154", "Section 61", "Section 63", "Section 199

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

TDS credit of Rs. 2,59,879/- was not allowed, resulting in a demand. She filed a rectification petition under section 154 of the Act, but no relief was granted. 13.3 It was further submitted that as per Rule 37BA read with section 199

DCIT vs. SASKEN NETWORK ENGG. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Sasken Network Engineering Limited, Of Income Tax, No.139/25, Amarjyothi Layout, Circle - 12(3), 14/3, 4Th Floor, Rastrothana Ring Road, Domlur, Bhavan (Opp. Rbi), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560071. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaics 4405 Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Smt. R. Premi, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Respondent By : Shri. C. Narayan, Ca Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.01.2013 Of Cit(Appeals)-Iii, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Facts & Circumstances Under Which The Said Appeal By The Revenue Arises For Consideration Are The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Engaged Inter Alia In The Business Of Installation & Commissioning Services. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income ('Rol') Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act') On October 31, 2007 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs 3,05,04,940 On Which Taxes Of Rs 1,02,67,963 Were Payable. On Account Of Credit For Taxes Deducted At Source (Tds') Amounting To Rs 1,21,26,857 & Self Assessment Tax Amounting To Rs 1,60,0000 A Page 2 Of 9 Refund Of Rs 34,58,894 Was Claimed. The Rol Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessment Was Concluded Vide Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated December 17, 2009 Wherein Income Returned By The Assessee In The Rol Was Accepted By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(3) (A0).

TDS without noticing the statutory position that in terms of section 199 r.w.s. 35BB (3)(i) that credit for TDS

BSR INFRATECH INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

TDS credit available to the Appellant has erred in disregarding the provisions of section 199 of the Act read with

SHRI. KANTHULA RAVISHANKAR,,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for asst

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazkanthula Ravishanker, ‘Ravshan’ No.7, Bruton Road, Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore . Respondent Appellant By : Shri A.C Raju, C.A Respondent By : Shri B.R Ramesh, Cit Date Of Hearing : 03-1-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-1-2018 O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) – 7, Bangalore Dated 30/8/2016 For Asst. Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly Stated, The Facts Of The Case Are As Under:- 2.1 The Assessee, Prop. K.K Corporation, Engaged In Business As Selling Agents For M/S Raymonal Ltd., Products For The States Of Ita No.1897/B/16 2

199) and that TDS credit ITA No.1897/B/16 10 should be allowed across those years. We also observed that the ld CIT(A) did not consider and dispose off the assessee’s claim that carry forward of earlier years TDS commencing from F.Y 2008-09 should be allowed for reducing yearwise utilization admittedly made before him. 3.5.2 Section

BADERUNNISA ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2023-24

section 199 read with Rule 37BA specifically provides for giving credit for the tax deducted at source to the extent the corresponding income is offered to tax. As the AO, CPC has restricted the TDS

M/S. HOTEL ASHOK GARDEN ,DHARWAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), , HUBLI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

199 reads as under: "(1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property

M/S. HOTEL ASHOK GARDEN ,DHARWAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), , HUBLI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

199 reads as under: "(1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property

M/S. HOTEL ASHOK GARDEN ,DHARWAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), , HUBLI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

199 reads as under: "(1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property

M/S. HOTEL ASHOK GARDEN ,DHARWAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), , HUBLI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

199 reads as under: "(1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. INFOSYS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TRUST, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2021-22

Section 199 - Ground relating to denial of credit of Tax Deducted Source 2.1 The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore has erred in not giving credit for TDS

M/S ELSAMEX - TWS - SNC JOINT VENTURE,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz & M/S.Elsamex-Tws-Snc Joint Venture, 12Th Floor, S.N.Towers, No.25/2, M.G. Road, Bangalore-560001. … Appellant Pan:Aaaae0553B Vs. 1. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bangalore-1, Bangalore. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Bangalore. … Respondent

199 of the Income Tax Act by availing all the benefits under Section 237 of the Act?" 7. From the material on record, it is clear that the assessee is a contractor who has been paid a sum of Rs.29,28,59,937/- as mobilization advance which is not an income. But by virtue of Section 194C, TDS

M/S ELSAMAX - TWS-SNC-JOINT VENTURE,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz & M/S.Elsamex-Tws-Snc Joint Venture, 12Th Floor, S.N.Towers, No.25/2, M.G. Road, Bangalore-560001. … Appellant Pan:Aaaae0553B Vs. 1. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bangalore-1, Bangalore. 2. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Bangalore. … Respondent

199 of the Income Tax Act by availing all the benefits under Section 237 of the Act?" 7. From the material on record, it is clear that the assessee is a contractor who has been paid a sum of Rs.29,28,59,937/- as mobilization advance which is not an income. But by virtue of Section 194C, TDS

M/S INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojaria & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/S. Infosys Ltd., The Assistant Electronic City, Commissioner It(Tp)A No. Hosur Road, Of Income Tax, 2012-13 718/Bang/2017 Bangalore – 560 Circle – 100. 3(1)(1), Pan: Bangalore. Aaaci4798L : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri K.V. Arvind & Shri Dilip, Revenue By Standing Counsels For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 15-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of Final Assessment Order Dated 28/02/2017 Passed By The Ld.Acit, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: General & Legal Grounds 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer & The Directions Of Hon’Ble Drp To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Grounds On Denial Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In Respect Of 4 Sez Units Viz., Chennai – Unit 1, Chandigarh, Mangalore - Unit 1 & Pune Unit 1 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Denying Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In The Return Of Income Totally Amounting To Rs. 2227,82,65,630 In Respect

TDS under section 195. However, it is submitted that the DRP refused to follow the same for the reason that the view has not been accepted by the department and an appeal to ITAT has been filed on this issue. It was therefore held that there is no infirmity in the proposed disallowance by the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO disallowed

IBM UNITED KINGDOM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS under section 192 in respect of all the salaries of the seconded employees, in respect of which costs were reimbursed to the IBM foreign companies; Thereafter, reassessment/ assessment proceedings were conducted on the IBM foreign entities and reassessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act/ assessment order under section

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS under section 192 in respect of all the salaries of the seconded employees, in respect of which costs were reimbursed to the IBM foreign companies; Thereafter, reassessment/ assessment proceedings were conducted on the IBM foreign entities and reassessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act/ assessment order under section

IBM CORPORATION,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS under section 192 in respect of all the salaries of the seconded employees, in respect of which costs were reimbursed to the IBM foreign companies; Thereafter, reassessment/ assessment proceedings were conducted on the IBM foreign entities and reassessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act/ assessment order under section

IBM ISRAEL LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS under section 192 in respect of all the salaries of the seconded employees, in respect of which costs were reimbursed to the IBM foreign companies; Thereafter, reassessment/ assessment proceedings were conducted on the IBM foreign entities and reassessment orders under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act/ assessment order under section