MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

TDS u/s 194A. The Ld. AR submitted that Section I94A does not apply to individuals unless he is a person liable to tax audit u/s 44AB of the I.T. Act 1961 and in this case, the assessee, being an individual is not within the purview of the said section. Therefore, it was submitted that the department will have to I.T.A

THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 , THIRUVALLA, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Thomas John Muthoot Dcit, Circle - 1 Muthoot Centre, Punnen Road Thiruvalla Vs. Thiruvananthapuram 695001 [Pan: Abnpt4694B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

194A r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6. On the other hand, the learned CIT-DR submitted that the assessee cannot take the benefit of the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act which was made effective from 01.04.2013 prospectively whereas the year in dispute is much prior to such amendment. Therefore, the assessee cannot

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR DEALERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR DEALERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

3. Thomas Muthoot v. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding