SRI. SHAMBULAL G CHHABRA vs. ADDL.C.I.T.,

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Shambulal G. Chhabria, Vs. Additional Commissioner Of No.G-5, Ramanashree Chambers, Income Tax, Lady Curzon Road, Range - 8, Malleswaram, Bangalore-560 001. Bangalore. Pan : Abhps 4411 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Chandrasekhar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, Cit Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.05.2019

TDS thereon, the details of assessee’s Fixed Deposit with Canara Bank. The rate of interest paid by the assessee to the unsecured loan creditors is in the range of 9%, 12% and 15%. In our considered view, for the authorities below to invoke the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act, it was necessary

AYUB ABDUL KHANDAR TAMATGAR,DHARWAD vs. JCIT, HUBLI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2010-11

40A(3). It is important note that in hiring trucks on needs basis, the truck owner or driver usually insist payment through cash as they don’t have bank account in local banks, and they also need cash liquidity for running and maintenance of truck enroute of carriage of goods to the destination. Thus, considering the facts that most

M/S. ACE DEVELOPERS,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7. The learned CIT(A)-2, Panaji has failed to appreciate that, the evidences unearthed were loose sheets and digital evidences, pen-drive, which has got no evidentiary value and legally inadmissible under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act as held in the following decisions. 1. Coinmon Cause (A Registered Society) Vs. Union of India [2017] (77 Taxmann.com

M/S. ACE DEVELOPERS,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7. The learned CIT(A)-2, Panaji has failed to appreciate that, the evidences unearthed were loose sheets and digital evidences, pen-drive, which has got no evidentiary value and legally inadmissible under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act as held in the following decisions. 1. Coinmon Cause (A Registered Society) Vs. Union of India [2017] (77 Taxmann.com

M/S. ACE DEVELOPERS,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7. The learned CIT(A)-2, Panaji has failed to appreciate that, the evidences unearthed were loose sheets and digital evidences, pen-drive, which has got no evidentiary value and legally inadmissible under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act as held in the following decisions. 1. Coinmon Cause (A Registered Society) Vs. Union of India [2017] (77 Taxmann.com

ACIT vs. M/S COASTAL ROAWAYS,

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoasst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Mangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S. Coastal Roadways, D.No.4-64/11, Bantwal Chambers, Balikampady, Mangalore. … Respondent Pan:Aaffc 5977 M Cross Objn.No.35/Bang/2013 (In Ita No.1139/Bang/2013) (Assessment Year: 2008-09) (By The Assessee) ****** Revenue By: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.Cit. Assessee By: Shri R.E.Balasubramaniyan, Ca. Date Of Hearing : 05/01/2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/01/2016 O R D E R Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm:

40A is being substituted to nullify the loophole created by the judicial decisions, the legal position remains the same even after the said substitution. The newly substituted sub- section (3) contains the phrase "a payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day..." This expression is analogous to the phrase "in a sum" used in erstwhile Sec.40A

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

TDS provision for payment to transporters were also not made by the assessee. Therefore, he also applied the provision of section 40a(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee. The assessee submitted reply and submitted that there is no seized material warranting any addition of income and relied on the various case laws

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

TDS provision for payment to transporters were also not made by the assessee. Therefore, he also applied the provision of section 40a(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee. The assessee submitted reply and submitted that there is no seized material warranting any addition of income and relied on the various case laws

M/S. AMRUT DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

TDS provision for payment to transporters were also not made by the assessee. Therefore, he also applied the provision of section 40a(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee. The assessee submitted reply and submitted that there is no seized material warranting any addition of income and relied on the various case laws

M/S. ORIGAMI CELLULO PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

40A(2)(b) reported in audit report and ITR. From a reading of these reasons, we are of the view that no prudent business person properly instructed in law would have inferred the TP risk parameter as a reason for scrutiny so as to mandatorily make reference u/s. 92C of the Act in terms of CBDT Instruction No.3/16 and failure

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-7, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7 (1998) 232 ITR 270 (Guj) 8 (2004) 266 ITR 573(All) 9 (2001) 113 Taxman 511 Dinesh Sherla 13/14 203- itxa-252-02.doc Respondent based on the Income Tax Rules and Depreciation Table is concerned, the Table is only states that certain categories, which are Machinery IT(TP)A No.2532/Bang/2019 United Brewries Ltd., Bangalore Page 34 of 70 and Plants, will

UNITED BREWERIES LTD,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

7. It is for this precise reason, Tribunal has rightly held that order passed by the TPO and. DRP is unsustainable in the eyes of law. The said finding is based on the authoritative principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd referred to herein supra which has been followed by Co-ordinate Bench

M/S DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTPU , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

40a(ia)), payments made in subsequent year in respect of these provisions and details of tax deducted at source on such payments along with proof of deposit of such TDS into Govt. account were called for and systematically verified. Since, the transactions were enormous in respect of these four assessment years, verifications were carried out randomly for different months

THE RADDI SAHAKARA BANK NIYAMITHA,DHARWAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HUBBALLI

In the result, the impugned order could not be faulted with

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2014-15

40A(ia) of the Act for non deduction of tax on interest paid to the members. A copy has also been annexed to the paper book page No.47, filed before us. Page 4 of 14 4. On the contrary, the ld.DR submitted that the notices fixing the date of hearing were duly issued to the assessee on 4 occasions

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

TDS as per Chapter XVII. Therefore, AO has rightly invoked section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that AO has raised 2 issues (i) disallowance under section 40A(3) and disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. During the course of hearing, learned Counsel relied on the judgment in assessee

MYSORE RACE CLUB LIMITED ,MYSORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, , MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

TDS as per Chapter XVII. Therefore, AO has rightly invoked section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that AO has raised 2 issues (i) disallowance under section 40A(3) and disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. During the course of hearing, learned Counsel relied on the judgment in assessee

DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals filed by assessee and revenue for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7. It is been submitted by the Ld.Counsel that the rebates are granted to the distributors on principal-to-principal basis on which TDS cannot be effectuated. It was also submitted that a provision has been created towards excess of commission and rebate that was reversed during the year on which no TDS liability arises. He relied on the details

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE vs. M/S.DELL INDIA PVT.LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals filed by assessee and revenue for A

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

7. It is been submitted by the Ld.Counsel that the rebates are granted to the distributors on principal-to-principal basis on which TDS cannot be effectuated. It was also submitted that a provision has been created towards excess of commission and rebate that was reversed during the year on which no TDS liability arises. He relied on the details