PARRY INFRASTRUCTURE CO P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

251 of the Act were not confined to the matter, which had been considered by the Income Tax Officer, as the first appellate authority is vested with all the wide powers of the assessing officer may have while making the assessment, but the issue whether these wide powers also include the power to discover a new source of income

M/S. SIVANANDHA MILLS LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

sections 36(1)(vii) rws 36(2) of the Income Tax Act”. 9.3 Further, it is submitted that no such information was ever asked for in the course of appellate proceedings. He submitted that the claim of bad debts needs to be allowed in view of the following judgments: (i) CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited

SIVANANDHA MILLS LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

sections 36(1)(vii) rws 36(2) of the Income Tax Act”. 9.3 Further, it is submitted that no such information was ever asked for in the course of appellate proceedings. He submitted that the claim of bad debts needs to be allowed in view of the following judgments: (i) CIT vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited

COOPER STANDARD AUTOMATIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENGALPUT vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

TDS is not applicable. The Ld.AR relied on the decision of ITAT, Chennai, in the case of Cairn Energy Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2010) 2 ITR 38. 11.1 Similarly, in the case of Testing and Development Charges, the Ld.AR argued that the assessee is using the output of technology without human intervention. For holding the payment as Fee for Technical

ESPN DIGITAL MEDIA (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

TDS returns noted that as to why the payment made by ESPN India should be considered as “Royalty” and hence liable for withholding tax. The AO noted that the word “use” in relation to provision of clause (iva) of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) has to be understood in a broad sense for availing the benefit

ESPN DIGITAL MEDIA (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

TDS returns noted that as to why the payment made by ESPN India should be considered as “Royalty” and hence liable for withholding tax. The AO noted that the word “use” in relation to provision of clause (iva) of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) has to be understood in a broad sense for availing the benefit

ESPN DIGITAL MEDIA (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

TDS returns noted that as to why the payment made by ESPN India should be considered as “Royalty” and hence liable for withholding tax. The AO noted that the word “use” in relation to provision of clause (iva) of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) has to be understood in a broad sense for availing the benefit

ESPN DIGITAL MEDIA (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

TDS returns noted that as to why the payment made by ESPN India should be considered as “Royalty” and hence liable for withholding tax. The AO noted that the word “use” in relation to provision of clause (iva) of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) has to be understood in a broad sense for availing the benefit

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

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI vs. SUNDARAM CLAYTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

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

251(1)(a) of the Act, the “power to set aside” are “ examining the issue afresh” has been omitted with effect from 01.06.2001 as per Finance Act 2001. 3.2) The order of the Hon’ble ITAT on the similar issue in the case of M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Limited (2013-TOIL-796-- ITAT-MAD, dt. 17.07.2013) has not been accepted

SUNDARAM CLAYTON LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

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

251(1)(a) of the Act, the “power to set aside” are “ examining the issue afresh” has been omitted with effect from 01.06.2001 as per Finance Act 2001. 3.2) The order of the Hon’ble ITAT on the similar issue in the case of M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Limited (2013-TOIL-796-- ITAT-MAD, dt. 17.07.2013) has not been accepted

SUNDARAM CLAYTON LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

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

251(1)(a) of the Act, the “power to set aside” are “ examining the issue afresh” has been omitted with effect from 01.06.2001 as per Finance Act 2001. 3.2) The order of the Hon’ble ITAT on the similar issue in the case of M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Limited (2013-TOIL-796-- ITAT-MAD, dt. 17.07.2013) has not been accepted

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI vs. SUNDARAM CLAYTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

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

251(1)(a) of the Act, the “power to set aside” are “ examining the issue afresh” has been omitted with effect from 01.06.2001 as per Finance Act 2001. 3.2) The order of the Hon’ble ITAT on the similar issue in the case of M/s.EIH Associated Hotels Limited (2013-TOIL-796-- ITAT-MAD, dt. 17.07.2013) has not been accepted

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

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

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

2% as per section 194C of the Act. Therefore, the AO has passed an order u/s.201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and computed short deduction of TDS and interest. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but could not succeed. The CIT(A) for the reasons stated in his 5 I.TA. No. 2842/Chny/2019 appellate

THE SALEM URBAN COOP BANK LTD.,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SALEM

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

sections": [ "201(1)", "201(1A)", "133(2A)", "251(1A)", "197A(2)" ], "issues": "Whether the assessee can be treated as in default for non-deduction of TDS

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-2015 Vodafone Cellular Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.1045-1046, Income Tax, Avinashi Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore 641 018 Coimbatore [Pan Aaacb 8614L ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS officer to prove that such taxes have not been paid by the aforesaid operators. In respect of consequential interest under section 201(1A) of the Act, since interest under section 201(1A) 10 ITA Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015. of the Act is compensatory in nature, it can be charged for the period for which the tax department was deprived of such

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-2015 Vodafone Cellular Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.1045-1046, Income Tax, Avinashi Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore 641 018 Coimbatore [Pan Aaacb 8614L ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS officer to prove that such taxes have not been paid by the aforesaid operators. In respect of consequential interest under section 201(1A) of the Act, since interest under section 201(1A) 10 ITA Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015. of the Act is compensatory in nature, it can be charged for the period for which the tax department was deprived of such