GUARDIAN INDIA OPERATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT 1, CHENNAI

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

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

TDS return acknowledgement for 106 Form 240, 26Q, and 27Q for all the 4 Quarters (Annexure 2) Show Cause Notice ("SCN") under 118 section 263 of the Act dated January 11, 2024 issued by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax ("Ld. PCTT") 9 Response to SCN dated January 24, 121 2024, filed with the Ld. PCIT 5. After culmination

VANITHA TEXTILES,PALLADAM vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

TDS provisions. The assessee preferred further appeal against the same and submitted that the dues were deposited well before due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1). However, Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowances in terms of amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 in Sec. 36(1)(va) as well as in Sec. 43B. The disallowance

M/S SREE LAKSHMI VENKATESWARA SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD.,PALLADAM vs. DCIT,CPC,, BENGALURU

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

TDS provisions. The assessee preferred further appeal against the same and submitted that the dues were deposited well before due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1). However, Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowances in terms of amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 in Sec. 36 as well as in Sec. 43B. Aggrieved, the assessee

SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO. PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. In other words, there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the two amounts – the employer’s liability is to be paid out of its income whereas the second is deemed an income, by definition, since

THE KTM JEWELLERY LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CORPORAE CIRCLE-2, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act are not applicable for the assessment year 2018-19 but will apply from assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years. Hence, this issue of assessee's appeal is allowed. 14. So far as the argument of the Ld. DR that the employees’ interest would be adversely impacted, is concerned

AMPO VALVES INDIA PVT LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, COIMBATORE

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

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

Section 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. (iii) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Ld.AO who had disallowed Rs.2,75,70,065/- towards non-deduction of TDS

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

DCIT , CORPORATE RANGE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

JCIT(OSD),CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(10, CHENNAI vs. ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIALTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ASPIRE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1069, 1070 & 1071/Chny/2022, 159 & 315/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18, 2016-17, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dcit/Jcit(Osd), M/S. Aspire Systems India Corporate Circle -1(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. Old No. 4, New No. 7, Ii Trust Link Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aacca-4543-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 39 & 40/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and thus, not liable to tax in India. Since, income of non-resident is not taxable in India, the assessee need not to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act on payment made to non-resident service providers. Since, the assessee is not required to deduct TDS

UCAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI-3,, CHENNAI

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

TDS / TCS 467 18. - Details of acquisition and use of assets 479 19. - Certificate for grant of expenses under Section 481 35(2AB) of the Act 20. 05.03.2022 Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act 485 21. 20.03.2022 Reply to the Notice under Section dated 488 05.03.2022 22. - Details of creditors 491 23. - Legal notices issued by parties

SHRI B. PURUSHOTHAMAN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-10(1),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 200/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri B. Purushothaman, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 12, Redhills Road, Kolathur, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 099. Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Ahipp9984F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai Dated 28.11.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The First Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Employee’S Contribution Amount To ₹.21,77,123/- Towards Epf.

36(1)(va); SLP dismissed" 5.4 The ld. DR could not controvert the above findings of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court as well as other case law referred hereinabove. Therefore, respectfully following the above decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we direct the Assessing

M/S.VA TECH WABAG LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2246, 2247 & 2248/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-2021) M/S. Va Tech Wabag Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of ‘Wabag House’’ Income Tax, No.17, 200 Feet Redial Road, Central Circle 3(2) S. Kolathur (Near Kamakshi Hospital) Chennai. Chennai 600 117 [Pan: Aabcv 0225G]

36(1)(vii). We also find that the Ld. CIT(A) has comprehensively analyzed the issue before adjudicating in favour of the assesse. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no case for any interference is required in his order. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority for AY-2017-18 is upheld

M/S.VA TECH WABAG LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2246, 2247 & 2248/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-2021) M/S. Va Tech Wabag Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of ‘Wabag House’’ Income Tax, No.17, 200 Feet Redial Road, Central Circle 3(2) S. Kolathur (Near Kamakshi Hospital) Chennai. Chennai 600 117 [Pan: Aabcv 0225G]

36(1)(vii). We also find that the Ld. CIT(A) has comprehensively analyzed the issue before adjudicating in favour of the assesse. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no case for any interference is required in his order. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority for AY-2017-18 is upheld

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI vs. MS VA TECH WABAG LIMITED, CHENNAI

36(1)(vii). We also find that the Ld. CIT(A) has comprehensively\nanalyzed the issue before adjudicating in favour of the assesse. Therefore, we are\nof the considered view that there is no case for any interference is required in his\norder. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority for AY-2017-18 is\nupheld

MAYAJAAL ENTERTAINMENT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act are not applicable for the assessment year 2018-19 but will apply from assessment year 2021- 22 and subsequent assessment years. Hence, this issue of assessee’s appeal is allowed. 3.1 As the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee, we delete the disallowance and allow this issue of assessee