BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

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.

550 results for “TDS”+ Section 42clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,839Delhi1,819Bangalore959Chennai550Kolkata396Ahmedabad274Hyderabad255Indore203Cochin163Karnataka162Chandigarh159Jaipur148Raipur117Pune108Surat81Visakhapatnam61Rajkot56Lucknow43Cuttack42Ranchi40Dehradun40Nagpur36Amritsar34Jodhpur30Allahabad26Agra23Guwahati19Patna16Telangana13Varanasi10SC9Jabalpur7Kerala5Punjab & Haryana4Panaji4Uttarakhand2J&K2Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 40105Addition to Income68Disallowance61Section 19557Section 143(3)56Deduction54TDS50Section 14A43Section 80H36Section 80

ARTHI BALIGA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NFAC, , DELHI

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

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

TDS was also deducted in the name of the firm, this has not been duly rebutted in the impugned order. He vehemently argued that there is no error in not taxing the capital gains in the hands of the assessee (in her capacity as the legal heir of the deceased partner), Hence the assessment order is not erroneous

Showing 1–20 of 550 · Page 1 of 28

...
30
Section 528
Section 153A15

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, INTL, TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1240/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
Section 115ASection 195(2)Section 250Section 44BSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

42 or Section 44D or (section 44DA or) section 115A\nor Section 293A apply for the purposes of computing profits or gains or any\nother income referred to in these section.'\n(f) Thus, I uphold the order passed by the A. 0. and the addition made by the\nAO is sustained. It is also seen that the appellant

ITO CORPORATE WARD 4(1), CHENNAI vs. MALAR ENERGY & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1417/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1417/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Malar Energy & Infrastructure Corporate Ward 4(1), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., No. 57, Pantheon Road, Chennai 600 034. Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aagcm5674F] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 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) 8, Chennai Dated 30.01.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Restricting The Addition/Disallowance Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] With Respect To The Tds Default Under Section 194C & 194H Of The Act To ₹.7,29,898/- Instead Of ₹.3,03,28,445/- By Considering Fresh Evidence In Violation Of Rule 46A Of The It Rules.

For Appellant: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194HSection 40

section 194H of the Act. Thus, the difference of commission payments between the one as per the ITR (₹.46,16,493/-) and the figure furnished at the time of scrutiny proceedings (₹.3,34,473/-) was held as commission paid without effecting TDS and accordingly a sum of ₹.42

ACIT, VELLORE vs. KRAMSKI STAMPING AND MOLDING INDIA PVT LTD., VELLORE

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

ITA 305/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.305/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Kramski Stamping & Income Tax, Molding India Pvt.Ltd Circle -1, Eraiyankadu Village, Anaicut Vellore. Block,Via Vrinchipuram, Vellore-632 104. Pan:Aadck3119L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 194CSection 40a

42,45,209/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny assessment and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee has paid an amount of `2,76,67,052/- to M/s.Spectronic Plating Pvt. Ltd., however, not deducted TDS u/s.194C of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and hence, called upon the assessee

ABAN SINGAPORE PTE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1329/CHNY/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1329/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 2. Stay Application No.9/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.1329/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) M/S. Aban Singapore Pte. Limited Dcit बनाम/ 113, Pantheon Road, Egmore S.O International Taxation-1(1), Vs. Egmore, Chennai-600 008. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaqca-2845-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao (Ca)-Ld. Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/ Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17-05-2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 28Section 40Section 44ASection 44B

42 or section 44D or section 44DA or section 115A or section 293A apply for the purposes of computing profits or gains or any other income referred to in those sections. (2) The amounts referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely : - (a) the amount paid or payable (whether in or out of India) to the assessee

VIRUDHUNAGAR CENTRAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ITO, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the years are

ITA 2055/CHNY/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan, Shri Abraham P. George & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2055 & 2056/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2012-13 & 2013-2014. The Virudhunagar District Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Tds Ward, 104/1, Madurai Road, Virudhungar. Virudhunagar 626 001. [Pan Aaaau 0147N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT
Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 201

TDS ward, 104/1, Madurai Road, Virudhungar. Virudhunagar 626 001. [PAN AAAAU 0147N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. C. Maruthappan, C.A. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 08-10-2018 : 09-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement आदेश

VIRUDHUNAGAR CENTRAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ITO, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the years are

ITA 2056/CHNY/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan, Shri Abraham P. George & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2055 & 2056/Chny/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2012-13 & 2013-2014. The Virudhunagar District Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Tds Ward, 104/1, Madurai Road, Virudhungar. Virudhunagar 626 001. [Pan Aaaau 0147N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT
Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 201

TDS ward, 104/1, Madurai Road, Virudhungar. Virudhunagar 626 001. [PAN AAAAU 0147N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. C. Maruthappan, C.A. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, PCIT. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 08-10-2018 : 09-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement आदेश

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2 (1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,, CHENNAI vs. M/S. PETROFAC ENGINEERING SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for both

ITA 656/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.656 & 657/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs M/S. Petrofac Engineering The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Services Pvt.Ltd. 7Th Floor, Block 9A Circle-2(1), International Taxation, Chennai. Dlf Infocity Sez 1/124 Shivaji Gardens, Nandambakkam Post Manapakkam, Chennai-600089. Pan: Aaecp 1211H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Ashik Shah, C.A ""For Respondent: 08.12.2021
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and tax treaty and thus, the assessee need not deduct TDS u/s.195 of the Act, on such payment and consequently, the assessee cannot be held to be an assessee in default u/s. 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Insofar as payment made by the assessee to Asia Pacific Network

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2 (1), INTERNTIONAL TAXATION, CHENNAI vs. M/S. PETROFAC ENGINEERING SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD,,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for both

ITA 657/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.656 & 657/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs M/S. Petrofac Engineering The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Services Pvt.Ltd. 7Th Floor, Block 9A Circle-2(1), International Taxation, Chennai. Dlf Infocity Sez 1/124 Shivaji Gardens, Nandambakkam Post Manapakkam, Chennai-600089. Pan: Aaecp 1211H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Ashik Shah, C.A ""For Respondent: 08.12.2021
Section 195Section 201(1)Section 9

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and tax treaty and thus, the assessee need not deduct TDS u/s.195 of the Act, on such payment and consequently, the assessee cannot be held to be an assessee in default u/s. 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Insofar as payment made by the assessee to Asia Pacific Network

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2) , CHENNAI vs. VETRI SOFTWARE INDIA (P) LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2011/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan,AdvocateFor Respondent: 02.11.2017
Section 251(1)(a)

42,51,188 2 103,08,485 11,67,952 433,30,017 Total 527,71,431 54,19,140 Upon confrontation on the difference between the amount credited as per P & L account and TDS certificates, the assessee had replied vide its letter dated 02-12-2010 regarding reconciliation as under: Reconciliation between Vetri Software India

V.ANBURAJ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 546/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

42,995 described as TDS reimbursement on the wrong understanding that since it was borne by the bank from whom the amount was received for professional services, it would not be liable to tax. The explanation for the omission under the circumstances should have been accepted when the particulars including the amounts received and tax deduction certificates were. filed

P.R.GOLD AND SILVER CRAFT,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT PONDICHERRY CIRCLE , PONDICHERRY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1143/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS u/s.194C of the Act. For this, assessee has raised various grounds which need not to be reproduced. The facts and circumstances are exactly identical in both the years and hence, we will take the facts from assessment year 2013-14. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee

P.R.GOLD AND SILVER CRAFT,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT PONDICHERRY CIRCLE , PONDICHERRY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1144/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS u/s.194C of the Act. For this, assessee has raised various grounds which need not to be reproduced. The facts and circumstances are exactly identical in both the years and hence, we will take the facts from assessment year 2013-14. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee

M/S PKF SRIDHAR & SANTHANAM LLP,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 669/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Oct 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 669 & 670/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-2020

For Appellant: Shri. D. Palanevel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

section 199 & 200 of the Act, credit for TDS should be allowed when the income pertains to TDS has been offered to tax. Since, the assessee has offered to tax income relating to TDS credit on the basis of mercantile system of accounting, has rightly claimed credit for TDS and said particulars has been furnished in ITR-5 filed

M/S PKF SRIDHAR & SANTHANAM LLP,CHENNAI vs. DCIT , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 670/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Oct 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 669 & 670/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-2020

For Appellant: Shri. D. Palanevel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

section 199 & 200 of the Act, credit for TDS should be allowed when the income pertains to TDS has been offered to tax. Since, the assessee has offered to tax income relating to TDS credit on the basis of mercantile system of accounting, has rightly claimed credit for TDS and said particulars has been furnished in ITR-5 filed

THE INDIA CEMENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

ITA 2174/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 10(39)Section 115JSection 14A

TDs cannot be considered as income tax payable by the\nassessee on its income therefore any interest paid on belated remittance of\nTDs also in the nature of expenditure deductible under the act and hence same\ncannot be added back to book profits computed under section 115 JB of the\nAct.\"\n9.2 Following the above, the interest of ₹5,42

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1689/CHNY/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

42. The assessee submits that the AO has failed to appreciate that this intimacy of relationship of the assets would hold good only in the case of direct insurance contracts entered between the insured. 43. Non-residents are liable on income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9 of the Act. Section 9(1)(i) deems broadly

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1691/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

42. The assessee submits that the AO has failed to appreciate that this intimacy of relationship of the assets would hold good only in the case of direct insurance contracts entered between the insured. 43. Non-residents are liable on income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9 of the Act. Section 9(1)(i) deems broadly

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 696/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

42. The assessee submits that the AO has failed to appreciate that this intimacy of relationship of the assets would hold good only in the case of direct insurance contracts entered between the insured. 43. Non-residents are liable on income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9 of the Act. Section 9(1)(i) deems broadly

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09,

ITA 1693/CHNY/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1673, 1688, 1689, 1691/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1693/Chny/2011, 36/Chny/2014 & 696/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. United India Insurance Co. Tax, V. Ltd., Large Tax Payer Unit, 24, Whites Road, Chennai – Chennai. 600 014. [Pan: Aaacu-5552-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, Ca Department Represented By : Shri. M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel & Ms. V. Pushpa, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 5(2)(b)

42. The assessee submits that the AO has failed to appreciate that this intimacy of relationship of the assets would hold good only in the case of direct insurance contracts entered between the insured. 43. Non-residents are liable on income deemed to accrue or arise in India under section 9 of the Act. Section 9(1)(i) deems broadly