DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. ORISSA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.61/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S Orissa State Civil Bhubaneswar Supplies Corporation Ltd Unit-8,Gopabandhu Nagar Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aaaco 2570 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

10 "Commission" cannot be the deciding factor for TDS when the payment is in lieu of work done including that for storage charges, incidental expenses etc. The learned assessing officer has made the addition for non deduction of tax U/s.40(a)(ia), when the assessee has not been declared as a defaulter under the 1st proviso of sub-section

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

Section 194A of the Act. Therefore, the AO treated the assessee as assessee-in-default for short-deduction of TDS applying 10

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

Section 194A of the Act. Therefore, the AO treated the assessee as assessee-in-default for short-deduction of TDS applying 10

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

Section 194A of the Act. Therefore, the AO treated the assessee as assessee-in-default for short-deduction of TDS applying 10

SASWAT INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2010-2011

section 80- IB of the Act requires involvement of an undertaking in developing and building housing projects approved by the local authority. The provisions nowhere required that only those developers who themselves own the land would receive the deduction under s. 80-IB(10) of the Act. Neither the provisions of s. 80-IB nor any other provisions contained

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS refund claim for that year of ₹ 12,047/- due to failure to file Form No. 10 within the due date of filing the return of income as required u/s 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the delay in uploading Form No. 10 cannot lead to disallowance of the amount actually set apart

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS refund claim for that year of ₹ 12,047/- due to failure to file Form No. 10 within the due date of filing the return of income as required u/s 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the delay in uploading Form No. 10 cannot lead to disallowance of the amount actually set apart

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. GRIDCO LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year :2010-2011 2011 Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Vs. Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Janapath, Bhubaneswar Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 9.5.2016 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0493/14-15 For The Assessment Year Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

10. Section 194J of the Act has only indicated that for the purpose of that section, fees for technical services would be as defined in section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. On considering that definition and what is involved in the proper transmission of the electrical energy as involved in this case. I am satisfied that the transmission involves

VODAFONE SPACETEL LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(TDS-1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, ITA No.307/CTK/2014, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.03, 04, 307 & 308/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vodafone Spacetel Limited, Vs. Acit (Tds), Unit-41, E-52, Infocity, Bhubaneswar Chandrasekharpur, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751024 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed These Appeals Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-I, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. Since The Issues Are Common In All The Appeals, Therefore, They Are Clubbed Together, Heard & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Take Up Assessee’S Appeal I.E. Ita No.307/Ctk/2014 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Facts Narrated Therein. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is In The Business Of Providing Telecommunication Services In Various Parts Of India. There Was Survey Operation U/S.133A Of The Act In The Premises Of The Assessee On 29.9.2011 & Revenue Found Violation Of Provisions Of Tds & Ita Nos.307 & 308/14 In Non-Deducting Tds In Respect Of Payments Dealt In The Financial Year

section 194H are applicable and considering the submission made by the assessee as on 26.2.2013 in respect of pre-paid SIM card, observed that the assessee has not deducted TDS and, therefore, calculated TDS at 10

VODAFONE SPACETAL LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, ITA No.307/CTK/2014, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.03, 04, 307 & 308/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vodafone Spacetel Limited, Vs. Acit (Tds), Unit-41, E-52, Infocity, Bhubaneswar Chandrasekharpur, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751024 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed These Appeals Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-I, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. Since The Issues Are Common In All The Appeals, Therefore, They Are Clubbed Together, Heard & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Take Up Assessee’S Appeal I.E. Ita No.307/Ctk/2014 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Facts Narrated Therein. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is In The Business Of Providing Telecommunication Services In Various Parts Of India. There Was Survey Operation U/S.133A Of The Act In The Premises Of The Assessee On 29.9.2011 & Revenue Found Violation Of Provisions Of Tds & Ita Nos.307 & 308/14 In Non-Deducting Tds In Respect Of Payments Dealt In The Financial Year

section 194H are applicable and considering the submission made by the assessee as on 26.2.2013 in respect of pre-paid SIM card, observed that the assessee has not deducted TDS and, therefore, calculated TDS at 10

VODAFONE SPACETAL LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, ITA No.307/CTK/2014, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.03, 04, 307 & 308/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vodafone Spacetel Limited, Vs. Acit (Tds), Unit-41, E-52, Infocity, Bhubaneswar Chandrasekharpur, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751024 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed These Appeals Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-I, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. Since The Issues Are Common In All The Appeals, Therefore, They Are Clubbed Together, Heard & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Take Up Assessee’S Appeal I.E. Ita No.307/Ctk/2014 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Facts Narrated Therein. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is In The Business Of Providing Telecommunication Services In Various Parts Of India. There Was Survey Operation U/S.133A Of The Act In The Premises Of The Assessee On 29.9.2011 & Revenue Found Violation Of Provisions Of Tds & Ita Nos.307 & 308/14 In Non-Deducting Tds In Respect Of Payments Dealt In The Financial Year

section 194H are applicable and considering the submission made by the assessee as on 26.2.2013 in respect of pre-paid SIM card, observed that the assessee has not deducted TDS and, therefore, calculated TDS at 10

VODAFONE SPACETEL LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(TDS-1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, ITA No.307/CTK/2014, ITA No

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.03, 04, 307 & 308/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vodafone Spacetel Limited, Vs. Acit (Tds), Unit-41, E-52, Infocity, Bhubaneswar Chandrasekharpur, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar- 751024 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce 2207 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sparsh Bhargava, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed These Appeals Against The Different Orders Of Cit(A)-I, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. Since The Issues Are Common In All The Appeals, Therefore, They Are Clubbed Together, Heard & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Take Up Assessee’S Appeal I.E. Ita No.307/Ctk/2014 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Facts Narrated Therein. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is In The Business Of Providing Telecommunication Services In Various Parts Of India. There Was Survey Operation U/S.133A Of The Act In The Premises Of The Assessee On 29.9.2011 & Revenue Found Violation Of Provisions Of Tds & Ita Nos.307 & 308/14 In Non-Deducting Tds In Respect Of Payments Dealt In The Financial Year

section 194H are applicable and considering the submission made by the assessee as on 26.2.2013 in respect of pre-paid SIM card, observed that the assessee has not deducted TDS and, therefore, calculated TDS at 10

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, TDS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

section 194H are applicable and, therefore, calculated TDS at 10% under the provisions of section 194H of the Act. 5. Similarly

BISWAJIT DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

10- 201 1 27. The Assessing Officer disallowed deduction for commission payment made to Monarch International amounting to Rs.5,88,761/- on the ground that the assessee had not deducted TDS u/s.194H from the payment made to the said party. 28. On appeal before the CIT(A) the assessee filed details of deduction of ITDS from the payments made

ITO, WARD-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. BISWAJIT DAS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

10- 201 1 27. The Assessing Officer disallowed deduction for commission payment made to Monarch International amounting to Rs.5,88,761/- on the ground that the assessee had not deducted TDS u/s.194H from the payment made to the said party. 28. On appeal before the CIT(A) the assessee filed details of deduction of ITDS from the payments made

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. DIVAKAR ENGINEERING PVT. LTD., SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

10- 201 1 running the hydra on hire. The hydra given on hire to different companies on which TDS is made as per applicable rate during the year. Therefore, depreciation @ 30% is charged on hydra. It was further stated that the hydra comes under the category of heavy motor vehicle and as the assessee is running them on hire, higher

M/S. BALASORE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,BALASORE vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.467/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Balasore Cooperative Bank Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Limited, Balasore Bibekananda Marg, Balasore-756001 Pan No. : Aaccb 7823 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,Advs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 04.08.2017, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1) That The Order Of The Id. Cit(Appeals) Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By The A.O. Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Unjustified & Not In Accordance With Law. 2) That The Addition Of Rs. 36,79,148/- U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Confirmed By Cit(Appeals) To The Extent Of Rs. 36,30,998/- Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Uncalled For & Not In Accordance With Law & The Same Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(Appeals). 3) That The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of Rs. 36,79,148/- As Detailed Below Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Unjustified & Hence Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(A) As The Genuineness Is Not In Doubt. Non-Deduction Of Tds Is A Separate Issue. A) Commission Payment To Dlds Collection Agents Rs. 33,45,248/- B) Legal Expenses Rs. 2,52,000/- C) Audit Fees Rs. 81,900/-

Section 40(a)(ia) became known on 10-9-2004, the appellant could have taken all the requisite steps to make deductions or, in any case, to make payment of the TDS

SHRI DILIP KUMAR NAYAK,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

TDS. The Assessing Officer's view is against the intent of the said circular. 15. This Court in Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 259/238 Taxman 287/383 ITR 59 (Kar) while considering the applicability of P a g e 22 | 25 ITA No. 86/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 10- 201 1 Section

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of Revenue is dismissed

TDS is required to be made on "any other sum chargeable under the provisions this Act". Chargeability is relevant in this 20 & ITA No.02/CTK/2014 case. As per decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT Vellis Bridge Gymkhan (1998) 229 ITR 1 (SC), if a person has not been brought in the ambit of Section by clear