MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. On further appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before this Tribunal

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. On further appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before this Tribunal

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. On further appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) confirmed the addition. However, on further appeal before this Tribunal

THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.EXTRAWEAVE P. LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Arattukulangara Complex 264B/Cmc 1 Vs. A.N. Puram, Alapuzha 688011 Sakteeswara Junction Cherthala 688524 Pan – Aabce5438L Appellant Respondent

3 there was a disallowance of Rs.55,78,022/- under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act for non-deduction of tax in respect of payments made to non-residents. Payments were made towards exhibition expenses, commission and sample testing charges to the non- residents. As per the AO TDS has to be deducted by the assessee before remitting

M/S SAFA ENTERPRISES ,KODUNGALLUR vs. THE ACIT , RANGE 2 , THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS on the payment against the services of M/s. Grecal Ltd. In his submission, the appellant relied on Circular No. 786, dated February 7, 2000. It is critical to remind the appellant that the aforementioned circular was withdrawn on October 23, 2009, and since the appellant had already made the payment amounting to Rs. 8,08,886/- to M/s Grecal

M/S SAFA ENTERPRISES ,KODUNGALLUR vs. THE ACIT , RANGE 2 ,CIRCLE 1, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS on the payment against the services of M/s. Grecal Ltd. In his submission, the appellant relied on Circular No. 786, dated February 7, 2000. It is critical to remind the appellant that the aforementioned circular was withdrawn on October 23, 2009, and since the appellant had already made the payment amounting to Rs. 8,08,886/- to M/s Grecal

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

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

3 of 8\nITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023\nassessee had not deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act as against the\npayments made to the said two entities on the ground that the said non\nresidents have business connection in India. The assessee's appeal was also\ndismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Thereafter the assessee filed an appeal

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

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

3 of 8\nITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023\n5. The AO while giving effect to the remand order of the Tribunal, had\nexamined the provision under which the payments made to the two entitles\nwould be liable to TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments\nwould fall under the provision of section

M/S.VIJAYA HOSPITALITY AND RESORTS LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ADCIT(TDS), COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

TDS, took a view that provisions of section 273B of the I.T.Act is not applicable and after referring the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of US Technology International Limited, reported in (2010) 195 taxman 323 (Ker.) imposed penalty of Rs.9,12,060. 3

SHRI SURESH GEORGE,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ADIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-3, THIRUVANATHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkeysuresh George Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Kurichyiel House International Taxation Payippad, Harippad Vs. Thiruvananthapuram Alappuzha 690 556 [Pan:Affpg5853B]

section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act would not apply inasmuch as the remuneration received, despite being subject to TDS u/s. 194J of the Act, is not a fee for technical services, but salary, tax deduction at source on which – over which he though has no control,hadto be, if at all, u/s. 192 of the Act. We find

INDIA GATEWAY TERMINAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,ICTT, VALLARPADAM vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CIRCLE 1(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

section 195 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the claim for deduction u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the year of payment of tax deduction at source of Rs. 31,315/- on the ground that the appellant had failed to remit the TDS amount in respect of the above sum. The AO also made a disallowance

INDIA GATEWAY TERMINAL PRIVATE LIMITED,ICTT, VALLARPADAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

section 195 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the claim for deduction u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the year of payment of tax deduction at source of Rs. 31,315/- on the ground that the appellant had failed to remit the TDS amount in respect of the above sum. The AO also made a disallowance

TRESA JOLLY,ERNAKULAM vs. DCIT , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

TDS amount deducted by the employer. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny by CASS and notice u/s.143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) was issued, for which the assessee furnished copy of acknowledgement for filing revised return and the annexure filed along with the return and declared her residential status as resident and withdrew

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

3 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 assessee had not deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act as against the payments made to the said two entities on the ground that the said non residents have business connection in India. The assessee’s appeal was also dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Thereafter the assessee filed an appeal

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

3 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 assessee had not deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act as against the payments made to the said two entities on the ground that the said non residents have business connection in India. The assessee’s appeal was also dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Thereafter the assessee filed an appeal

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

3 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 assessee had not deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act as against the payments made to the said two entities on the ground that the said non residents have business connection in India. The assessee’s appeal was also dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Thereafter the assessee filed an appeal