Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

168 results for “TDS”+ Section 194Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai643 Delhi409 Bangalore259 Kolkata201 Chennai168 Karnataka56 Hyderabad41 Jaipur26 Dehradun20 Ahmedabad20 Cochin15 Indore15 Pune14 Chandigarh13 Telangana11 Panaji10 Amritsar10 Rajkot9 Jabalpur8 Raipur8 Surat8 Patna8 Cuttack6 Agra5 Calcutta4 Allahabad4 Lucknow4 Jodhpur4 Visakhapatnam3 SC3 Nagpur2 Varanasi2 Ranchi1 Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 40117 TDS68 Section 194J58 Section 20156 Deduction56 Disallowance54 Section 201(1)48 Addition to Income46 Section 19537 Section 194C

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 2804/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

Showing 1–20 of 168 · Page 1 of 9

...

31

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

ITA 376/CHNY/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 754/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 377/CHNY/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1414/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 755/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 1644/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1415/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS under section 194J of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied tax under section 201(1) as well as interest

SRI KAUVERY MEDICAL CARE [ INDIA ] LTD,TRICHY vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, MADURAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 427/CHNY/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 427/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri. A. Arjunraj, CAFor Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 192Section 194JSection 28

194J of the Act. Since, the assessee does not deducted TDS on impugned payment, the Assessing Officer has rightly computed TDS and interest as per the provisions of section

SANTHANAGOPALAN CHITRA,TIRUCHIRAPALLI vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1,, TIRUCHIRAPALLI

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

ITA 1725/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1725/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23 Santhanagopalan Chitra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, B-2(S), X-A, Cross, Thillainagar, Tds Ward 1, Tiruchirapalli 620 018. Tiruchirapalli 620 002. [Pan: Aaepc5516B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.05.2024 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. We Find No Representation On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Application Filed Seeking Adjournment. Thus, The Assessee Called Absent & Set Exparte. We Proceed To Decide The Appeal On Merits After Hearing The Ld. Dr Basing On The Material Available On Record.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 1Section 192Section 194JSection 201

TDS as to whether under section 194J or 192 of the Act. The assessee clearly admitted that TDS is required

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHREE BALAJI COMMUNICATIONS, CHENNAI

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

ITA 36/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 36/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Shree Balaji Communications, Income Tax, Vs. No. 18/126, Dhan Enclave, Non-Corporate Circle 20, Bhajani Kovil St., Choolaimedu, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 094. [Pan:Abifs0605A]] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. M.M. Bhusari, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.07.2016 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Iv, Chennai, Dated 16.10.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. In This Appeal, The Only Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Is With Regard To Deletion Of Addition Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Towards

For Appellant: Dr. M.M. Bhusari, CITFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar, Advocate

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 19Section 194CSection 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

TDS under section 194J of the Act meant for professional/technical services/royalty but the assessee has deducted TDS under section 194C

INFONET COMM ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, SALEM

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

ITA 2842/CHNY/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2842/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Narayanan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh Periasamy, JCIT

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194J of the Act, whereas, the assessee has deducted TDS at the rate of 2% as per section 194C

ACIT, CC - 1 (2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STUDIO GREEN,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross

ITA 2427/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2427/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 & C.O. No. 99/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No. 2427/Chny/2019] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Studio Green, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Vs. Old No. 13, New No. 6, Ii Floor, Investigation Wing, Room No. 311, 6, Thanikachalam Road, No. 46, Mg Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Absfs6433Q] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri S. Bharath, Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri V. Vivek Rajan, C.A. : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 18.08.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai, Dated 26.06.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Only Issue Involved In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Relating To Whether The Second Proviso Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Applies Retrospectively Or Only Prospective From The Date Of 2

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 40

TDS under section 194J of the Act. No TDS was deducted, therefore, by invoking the 3 I.T.A. No. 2427/Chny/2019 & C.O. No. 99/Chny/2019

DCIT , TDS CIRCLE , COIMBATORE vs. M/S KOVAI MEDICAL CENTRE AND HOSPITAL LIMITED , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1004/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1004/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Kovai Medical Centre & Income Tax, V. Hospital Limited, Tds Circle, 99 Avinashi Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore - 641 014. [Pan: Aaack-9192-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit -Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri. M. Rajan, CIT -DRFor Respondent: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 133ASection 192Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)

TDS as per the provisions of section 194J of the Act. 4. Consequent to survey, proceedings u/s. 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act, was initiated

MANIMEGALAI GANESAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP RANGE 10, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 1330/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1328, 1329, 1330 & 1331/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Manimegalai Ganesan, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 1, Millers Road, Kilpauk, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 010. Non Corporate Range 10, [Pan: Aaepm4356K] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri C. Subramanian, C.A. : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Ms. R. Anita, Jcit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 15.07.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai, All Dated 21.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Adjudication: 1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 In Confirming The Additions Is Against The Weight Of Evidence & Probabilities Of The Case. 2. Ground 1-Disallowance Of Commission Paid To Dr.S.P.Ganesan

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 69C

TDS under section 194J of the Act and is hit by the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 4.1 So far as second

MANIMEGALAI GANESAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP RANGE 10, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 1328/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1328, 1329, 1330 & 1331/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Manimegalai Ganesan, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 1, Millers Road, Kilpauk, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 010. Non Corporate Range 10, [Pan: Aaepm4356K] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri C. Subramanian, C.A. : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Ms. R. Anita, Jcit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 15.07.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai, All Dated 21.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Adjudication: 1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 In Confirming The Additions Is Against The Weight Of Evidence & Probabilities Of The Case. 2. Ground 1-Disallowance Of Commission Paid To Dr.S.P.Ganesan

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 69C

TDS under section 194J of the Act and is hit by the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 4.1 So far as second

MANIMEGALAI GANESAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP RANGE 10, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 1331/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1328, 1329, 1330 & 1331/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Manimegalai Ganesan, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 1, Millers Road, Kilpauk, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 010. Non Corporate Range 10, [Pan: Aaepm4356K] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri C. Subramanian, C.A. : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Ms. R. Anita, Jcit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 15.07.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai, All Dated 21.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Adjudication: 1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 In Confirming The Additions Is Against The Weight Of Evidence & Probabilities Of The Case. 2. Ground 1-Disallowance Of Commission Paid To Dr.S.P.Ganesan

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 69C

TDS under section 194J of the Act and is hit by the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 4.1 So far as second

MANIMEGALAI GANESAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP RANGE 10, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 1329/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1328, 1329, 1330 & 1331/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Manimegalai Ganesan, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 1, Millers Road, Kilpauk, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 010. Non Corporate Range 10, [Pan: Aaepm4356K] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri C. Subramanian, C.A. : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Ms. R. Anita, Jcit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 15.07.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai, All Dated 21.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Adjudication: 1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12 In Confirming The Additions Is Against The Weight Of Evidence & Probabilities Of The Case. 2. Ground 1-Disallowance Of Commission Paid To Dr.S.P.Ganesan

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40aSection 69C

TDS under section 194J of the Act and is hit by the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 4.1 So far as second

SRI KAVERY MEDICAL CARE(TRICHY)LIMITED,TRICHIRAPALLI vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, , MADURAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 724/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 724/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sri Kavery Medical Care Acit, (Trichy) Limited, V. Tds Circle, No 1 2 &3 Kavery Medical Centre, Madurai. Keelachatram Road, Tennur, Trichirapalli Dist 620 017. [Pan: Aabck-8115-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal. Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CA

Section 133ASection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS u/s. 194J of the Act does not arise. We find that as per the provisions of section 194J of the Act, any person

ACIT TDS CIRCLE 3, CHENNAI vs. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1348/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1348 & 1349/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Vodafone South Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. (Now Known As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Tds Circle – 3, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabcb5847L] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), [Formerly Known As Vodafone Ward I(6), South Ltd.] Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, : Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 02.02.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. Since Common Ground Has Been Raised By The Same Assessee, Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

Section 194HSection 200Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 201(3)(i)Section 203

TDS is required to be deducted. We also accept the contention raised by Mr. Jhanwar that even otherwise in view of divergent judicial views, one in favour of the assessee is required to be adopted as per settled law. Taking into consideration the above conclusion, the first issue is required to be answered in favour of assessee. 53. Regarding Section