GREENSTAR FERTILIZERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, MADURAI

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.274/Chny/2023 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.275/Chny/2023 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S. Greenstar Fertilizers Limited, Acit बनाम Spic House, 7Th Floor, 88,Mount Road Tds Circle, / Vs. Guindy, Chennai-600 032. Madurai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcg-9451-D (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) : ('(थ& / Respondent) अपीलाथ& की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar '(थ& की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal(Jcit) –Ld.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-06-2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-06-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Grievance Of The Assessee In Captioned Appeals For Assessment Years (Ay) 2018-19 & 2019-20 Is Identical I.E., Demand Raised U/S 201(1) / (1A) For Want Of Tax Deduction At Source (Tds) On Certain Payments In Terms Of Sec. 194H Of The Act. These Payments Are In The Nature Of Rebates Given By The Assessee To Its Dealers / Distributors. The Impugned Orders Have Been Passed By Learned

section 194H of the act, it was implied that nexus between TDS and corresponding income was rather notional / conceptual. 5.6 TDS

GREENSTAR FERTILIZERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, MADURAI

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.274/Chny/2023 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.275/Chny/2023 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S. Greenstar Fertilizers Limited, Acit बनाम Spic House, 7Th Floor, 88,Mount Road Tds Circle, / Vs. Guindy, Chennai-600 032. Madurai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcg-9451-D (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) : ('(थ& / Respondent) अपीलाथ& की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. Ar '(थ& की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal(Jcit) –Ld.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-06-2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-06-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Grievance Of The Assessee In Captioned Appeals For Assessment Years (Ay) 2018-19 & 2019-20 Is Identical I.E., Demand Raised U/S 201(1) / (1A) For Want Of Tax Deduction At Source (Tds) On Certain Payments In Terms Of Sec. 194H Of The Act. These Payments Are In The Nature Of Rebates Given By The Assessee To Its Dealers / Distributors. The Impugned Orders Have Been Passed By Learned

section 194H of the act, it was implied that nexus between TDS and corresponding income was rather notional / conceptual. 5.6 TDS

MANIMUTHU,DINDIGUL vs. ITO WARD 1, DINDIGAL

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 1450/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 P. Manimuthu, Income Tax Officer, No.1, A.K. Traders, Shanmuga V. Ward -1, Towers, Dindigul. Dindigul Road, Vadamadurai, Dindigul District – 624 802. [Pan: Aohpm-0872-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Andichamy, Ca : Smt. M.S. Deeptha, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

194H on which TDS is deductible Further ,as per Section:194H:Commission or brokerage: Any person, not being an individual

FUJI ELECTRIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

TDS liability arises. ‐ Sections 194C, 194H, 194I, and 194J require TDS only on the income component of payments. :-7-: ITA. No.:701/Chny/2025

KONDA SRINIVASAIYER DAMODHARAN KISHORI LAL ,MADURAI vs. PCIT-1, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 290/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Konda Srinivasaiyer The Principal Commissioner Of Damodharan Kishori Lal, V. Income Tax-1, No. 17 & 18, Kakathoppu Madurai. Street, Madurai – 625 001. [Pan: Afbpk-6965-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Choradia, Aca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

TDS on said amount or how provisions of section 194C or 194H of the Act is not applicable. Therefore, it appears

M/S EURO HOMES ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT , CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our observation given herein above

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 668/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Euro Homes, Deputy Commissioner Of Lakshmi Plaza, Ground Floor, V. Income Tax, 1087 Avinashi Road, Cpc, Bengaluru. Near Lakshmi Mills Junction, Coimbatore. [Pan: Aadfe-9073-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. N.V Lakshmi, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2023

section quoted by the Deductor while filing his TDS Statement cannot determine the "Head of income under which it is to be reported in the Deductee's return of income. d) The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax {Appeals) ought to have appreciated that, an income would be classified under different. "Heads of Income only based on the nature

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.587/Chny/2017 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2010-11

TDS under section 194H :- 5 -: on such discount. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowances relying on the order

KRISHNAVEL UMAMAHESWARI,MADURAI vs. ACIT, NCC-1,, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1299/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Krishnavel Umamaheswari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 10E, Nallamadan Koil Lane, Income Tax, North Masi Street, Madurai 625 001. Non Corporate Circle 1, Madurai. [Pan:Aaopu8528K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Raised 2 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A)

TDS under section 194H of the Act has been deducted by the companies like Reliance Money, Matrix, A care, etc. The assessee

M/S. DISHNET WIRELESS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 1 (4),, CHENNAI

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

194H of the Act and all\nproceedings pursuant thereto has been granted by Hon'ble Madras High\nCourt in the appellant's own case and therefore, the appellate\nproceedings should have been kept in abeyance till the disposal of WRIT\nby Hon'ble Madras High Court.\n6. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSINOER OF INCOME TAX,, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

section 194) are\napplicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said circular,\nit was clarified that TPAs who are making payment on behalf of insurance\ncompanies to hospitals for settlement of medical/insurance bills etc., are liable\nto be deduct TDS u/s.194) on such payments. Therefore, we are of the\nconsidered view that when the CBDT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP CIRCLE 8, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP WARD 8, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

194H of\nthe Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party\nadministrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it\nis very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of\nprimarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194) are\napplicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP CIRCLE 8, CHENNAI

194H of\nthe Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party\nadministrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it\nis very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of\nprimarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194) are\napplicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME OF TAX, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SUNDARAM ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sundaram Asset Management Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle 1 (Ltu), Chennai. No. 46, Sundaram Towers, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. [Pan: Aaics4257J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Venkat Ramanan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Dated 18.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We

TDS for the payment 3 I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/25 made to the Mutual Fund Distributors and accordingly, added the same to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 30.01.2020. The assessee challenged the same before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the order of the ITAT in assessee’s own case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sundaram Asset Management Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle 1 (Ltu), Chennai. No. 46, Sundaram Towers, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. [Pan: Aaics4257J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Venkat Ramanan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Dated 18.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2015-16. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We

TDS for the payment 3 I.T.A. Nos.2280 & 2281/Chny/25 made to the Mutual Fund Distributors and accordingly, added the same to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 30.01.2020. The assessee challenged the same before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the order of the ITAT in assessee’s own case