SOUTH INDIA FREIGHT CARRIERS ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Years : 2015-16

disallowance, u/s 194C and 40(a)(ia) would get attracted. On this aspect, as indicated above a reading of provisions of Section 194C(6), prior to the amendment of by Finance Act, 2015 (w.e.f. 1-06- 2015), makes it clear that during the relevant Assessment year, if the sub-contractors have supplied their PAN to the person making payments

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

Section 40A(3) whatsoever warranting disallowance under the said provision. As submitted earlier, there are 5 unions in the marker for supplying trucks for IMFL and beer transport from Palakkad District, namely: ITA No.948 to 950/Bang/2023 Page 18 of 23 a. Palakkad District Lorry Owners Association b. BMS Kanjikode Lorry Unit c. Palakkad District Lorry Transporting Agents Association d. Palakkad

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

Section 40A(3) whatsoever warranting disallowance under the said provision. As submitted earlier, there are 5 unions in the marker for supplying trucks for IMFL and beer transport from Palakkad District, namely: ITA No.948 to 950/Bang/2023 Page 18 of 23 a. Palakkad District Lorry Owners Association b. BMS Kanjikode Lorry Unit c. Palakkad District Lorry Transporting Agents Association d. Palakkad

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

Section 40A(3) whatsoever warranting disallowance under the said provision. As submitted earlier, there are 5 unions in the marker for supplying trucks for IMFL and beer transport from Palakkad District, namely: ITA No.948 to 950/Bang/2023 Page 18 of 23 a. Palakkad District Lorry Owners Association b. BMS Kanjikode Lorry Unit c. Palakkad District Lorry Transporting Agents Association d. Palakkad

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

disallowance under section 40[a][ia] is not warranted under the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Without prejudice the learned authorities below failed to appreciate that by virtue of the provisions of section 194C(3

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

disallowances made by the AO. 25. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. . Page 11 of 13 26. The learned AR before us submitted that there was no contract between the assessee and the truck owners and therefore the provisions of section 194C of the Act cannot be attracted

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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

194C and (vii) were fulfilled. 3. Pursuant to the directions of Ld.Pr.CIT in the order passed under section 263 dated 21/03/2018, Ld.AO called upon assessee to furnish details of transportation charges and to justify non-disallowance

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

3 determined at Rs.47,26,99,808, as against the returned income of Rs.40,06,97,810, in view of the Assessing Officer making a 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

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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 so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee's ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that

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

disallowance made requires to be deleted. 5. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. submitted that assessee has paid the hire charges to the vehicle owners which falls under the purview of section 194C of the Act on which payment, assessee is liable to deduct TDS, which is not deducted by the assessee mainly the applicability of section

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

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

3 Transport 24,32,489/- Sales by Air Transport Outward (Exports-Air) Outward (Export- 4 Transport Sales by Sea Transport Sea) 15,70,513/- 71,76,751/- 13. Admittedly, the assessee did not deduct tax at source on the payments made to the transporters. The AO was of the view that under the provisions of 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

194C of I.T. Act? 6. Whether the Tribunal is justified in law in directing the assessing authority to allow deduction under section 10A in respect of amount disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) without appreciating the fact that the income enhanced on account of deeming provisions cannot be considered for the purpose of claiming benefit under the provisions of section

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

3 cars in relation to which expenses were disallowed. The year under is the very first year of claim for Mini Cooper and second year of claim for Aston Martin. 9.8 Hence, the learned CIT(A) held that since assessee failed to prove predominant business use, depreciation and related expenses of ₹57,79,069/- disallowed by the AO was proper