SRI. SINGONAHALLI CHIKKAREVANNA GANGADHARAIAH,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

section 194C of the Act do not arise and consequently disallowance under section 40[a][ia] is not warranted under

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

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) /OSD , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

ROBERT BOSCH ENGINEERING AND BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIAVTE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) /OSD LTU , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

DELL INDIA P LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), LTU, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

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

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

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

194C to 194J. Assessee as stated has already disallowed the entire amount in the computation of income as no TDS has been made. Once an amount was disallowed under section

SRI. K R SANTHOSH KUMAR,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE- 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013 – 14

disallowance of the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. In response, assessee vide letter dated 19/07/2018 filed details of transportation to whom the pavements were made and declaration from such transporters under section 194C

M/S TIMES VPL LTD. vs. ADDL.C.I.T.,

In the result, the assessee's appeal for both assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

disallowance of Rs.7,20,00,000 under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax on the said payment which fell within the ambit of the provisions of section 194C

M/S. SRI BALAJI PRASANNA TRAVELS,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(3)(1), BENGALURU

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

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

194C and not section 194I were applicable in the appellant’s case. However, as the appellant had not deducted TDS on payments above Rs.30,000/-, the A.O. disallowed

M/S FINE BLANKING PVT. LTD.,,HUBLI vs. JCIT, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2012-13

disallowed same under section 40(a)(ia) - Assessee contended before Commissioner (Appeals) that because of provision of section 194C(6), she was not liable

JAYARAM REDDY BOOPESH REDDY,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowed Rs. 38,18,910/- being 30% of Rs. 1,27,29,699/- of the impugned expenses under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 46. Before the ld. CIT-A, the assessee argued that the payments were not covered under section 194C

A. KISORE RAO AND OTHERS vs. ITO,

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed as indicated above

disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act but where tax is deducted by the assessee, even under bonafide wrong impression, under wrong provisions of TDS, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be invoked. Here in the present case before us, the assessee has deducted tax under Section 194C

JAYARAMA REDDY BOOPESH REDDY,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowed Rs.38,18,910/- being 30% of Rs.1,27,29,699/- of the impugned expenses under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 46. Before the Id. CIT-A, the assessee argued that the payments were not covered under section 194C

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. NUTRICRAFT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

section 194C(7) does not result in disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) even as the benefit of section 194C(6) is available

ASHOK IRAPPA BANNUR ,BAGALKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BELAGAVI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

section 194C(6) and (7) of the Act, and in view of the above, the order of assessment was not erroneous, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The learned CIT was not justified on facts, in appreciating that the details filed demonstrate that the information was available before the completion of the assessment proceedings and no disallowance

IVORYBRICK HOMES LLP,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act but where tax is deducted by the assessee, even under bonafide wrong Page 8 of 10 impression, under wrong pro visions of TDS, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be invoked. Here in the present case before us, the assessee has deducted tax under Section 194C

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RANGE-4 , BANGALORE vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year: 2009-10

disallowance of sub-contracting chares of RS.16,21,851/- made by assessing authority on the ground that the assessee had failed to deduct tax at source under section 194C