FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (TPA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

153(1)…………………………….. …………………………….. Explanation 1 ……………………. (i) ……………………… (ii) the period during which the assessment proceeding is stayed by an order or injunction of any court; or ..…………………… shall be excluded. -15- I.T.A. Nos. 733 to 744 /Chny/2019 Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid period, the period of limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and sub-section

RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

TDS provisions are concerned especially in view of the amendment of Section 195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the company is exporting their products, being automobile components, to the clients at Germany mostly to M/s. Volkswagen

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

TDS provisions are concerned especially in view of the amendment of Section 195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the company is exporting their products, being automobile components, to the clients at Germany mostly to M/s. Volkswagen

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

TDS provisions are concerned especially in view of the amendment of Section 195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the company is exporting their products, being automobile components, to the clients at Germany mostly to M/s. Volkswagen

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

TDS provisions are concerned especially in view of the amendment of Section 195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the company is exporting their products, being automobile components, to the clients at Germany mostly to M/s. Volkswagen

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

TDS provisions are concerned especially in view of the amendment of Section 195, Explanation 2 of the Act. Therefore, he confirmed the disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6.3 Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the company is exporting their products, being automobile components, to the clients at Germany mostly to M/s. Volkswagen

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

TDS without any further delay. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 19. The next ground is related to levy of interest u/s 234D to the extent of 6,10,636. 20. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the applicability of interest u/s 234D and levy correct amount of interest. 21. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

TDS without any further delay. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 19. The next ground is related to levy of interest u/s 234D to the extent of 6,10,636. 20. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the applicability of interest u/s 234D and levy correct amount of interest. 21. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

TDS without any further delay. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 19. The next ground is related to levy of interest u/s 234D to the extent of 6,10,636. 20. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the applicability of interest u/s 234D and levy correct amount of interest. 21. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

KRISHNASWAMY YOGANANDAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

TDS under section 194H - Contention of the assessee that section 194H is not applicable as there is no ‘payment or credit’ by the assessee to the distributor cannot be accepted.” 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, and the decision of Id. Jurisdictional Tribunal as above, it is held that the Assessing Officer has correctly applied

NEELARAJ VINOTH,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CC-2, , TRICHY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1982/Chny/2024 & C.O.No. 60/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Neelaraj Vinoth, Income Tax, V. 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -2, Perambalur – 621 212, Trichy. Tamilnadu. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2119/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Neelaraj Vinoth, Assistant Commissioner Of 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, V. Income Tax, Perambalur – 621 212, Central Circle -2, Tamilnadu. Trichy. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS in his various ROls filed for this year, of which the original ROI and the 1st revised ROI were filed prior to the search. This being the case, the seized letter did not reveal anything new to the Department and thus the same can never be touted as an incriminating material bringing to light some undisclosed income or undisclosed