M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

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

section 195(1) of the Act holding that the amounts paid to lead managers and managers were chargeable to tax in India as fees for technical services within the meaning of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The Appellate Commissioner also upheld the order of the assessing officer. On further appeal before the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

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

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

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act be given retrospective application. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT Appeals was not justified in sustaining the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of TDS on Professional Charges 72

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

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

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

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act be given retrospective application. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT Appeals was not justified in sustaining the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of TDS on Professional Charges 72

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

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

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

M/S.ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, ground Nos

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

section 2 33,32,307 36(1)(va) of the Act on late ITA No.489/Coch/2016 & SA 60/Coch/2017. 4 M/s.Allianz Cornhill International Services Pvt.Ltd. payment of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI 3. Erroneous imputation of 4 interest on amounts which are not in the nature of loan 4. Erroneous granting of credit 5 period which is short in 6,72

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.

TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments would fall under the provision of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. If the said payment would fall u/s. 9(1)(vii), whether the said payments are eligible for exemption as per the DTAA. Finally, the AO arrived the conclusion that the non-residents do not have any business connection

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.

TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments would fall under the provision of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. If the said payment would fall u/s. 9(1)(vii), whether the said payments are eligible for exemption as per the DTAA. Finally, the AO arrived the conclusion that the non-residents do not have any business connection

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments would fall under the provision of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. If the said payment would fall u/s. 9(1)(vii), whether the said payments are eligible for exemption as per the DTAA. Finally, the AO arrived the conclusion that the non-residents do not have any business connection

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.

TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments would fall under the provision of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. If the said payment would fall u/s. 9(1)(vii), whether the said payments are eligible for exemption as per the DTAA. Finally, the AO arrived the conclusion that the non-residents do not have any business connection

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. The AO also considered whether the said payments would fall under the provision of section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. If the said payment would fall u/s. 9(1)(vii), whether the said payments are eligible for exemption as per the DTAA. Finally, the AO arrived the conclusion that the non-residents do not have any business connection

THE DCIT, CEN CIRCLE, TVM, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.KK ROCKS & GRANITES INDIA P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

72,00,000 2012-2013 2,75,75,702 3.1 According to the Assessing Officer, the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 with effect from 01.04.2013 (assessment year 2013-2014) only, hence, no application for the years under consideration. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition by placing reliance

THE DCIT, CEN CIRCLE, TVM, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.KK ROCKS & GRANITES INDIA P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

72,00,000 2012-2013 2,75,75,702 3.1 According to the Assessing Officer, the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 with effect from 01.04.2013 (assessment year 2013-2014) only, hence, no application for the years under consideration. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition by placing reliance

THE DCIT, CEN CIRCLE, TVM, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.KK ROCKS & GRANITES INDIA P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

72,00,000 2012-2013 2,75,75,702 3.1 According to the Assessing Officer, the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 with effect from 01.04.2013 (assessment year 2013-2014) only, hence, no application for the years under consideration. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition by placing reliance

THE DCIT, CEN CIRCLE, TVM, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.KK ROCKS & GRANITES INDIA P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

72,00,000 2012-2013 2,75,75,702 3.1 According to the Assessing Officer, the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 with effect from 01.04.2013 (assessment year 2013-2014) only, hence, no application for the years under consideration. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition by placing reliance