DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORP. LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and COs of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

194A (1) laid down that taxes to be deducted from the interest credited to the interest payable account irrespective of threshold of Rs 2500/- per depositors to the individual parties. Therefore, he held that the assessee cannot be treated as an assessee in default under the provisions of section 201 (1) of the act. Therefore consequently he also held that

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

1. Proportionate Methodology: Section 40(a)(ia) provides that if an assessee tails to deduct or deducts short TDS on specified payments (sections 194A

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

1. Proportionate Methodology: Section 40(a)(ia) provides that if an assessee tails to deduct or deducts short TDS on specified payments (sections 194A

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

1. Proportionate Methodology: Section 40(a)(ia) provides that if an assessee tails to deduct or deducts short TDS on specified payments (sections 194A

M/S. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS), Ghaziabad A Y 2005-06 to 2011-12 ITA No 5968 to 5974/ Del/2015 7. Sub-section (1) of section 194A

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GARDENIA SHELTERS (P) LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

TDS u/s 1941 of the Income Tax Act. 8.2 Sub-Section (1) of Section 194A casts an obligation on the person

THE BRANCH MANAGER,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble & The Branch Manager Vs Addl. Cit (Tds) Axis Bank Ltd. Ghaziabad No. B2-B3, Sector-16 Noida Aaacu2414K (Respondent) (Appellant)

section 201(1)/201(1A), raising a demand of Rs. 235,63,873/- for AY 2014-15 and Rs. 1,78,945/- for AY 2013-14. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee was not required to deduct any TDS u/s 194A

THE BRANCH MANAGER,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble & The Branch Manager Vs Addl. Cit (Tds) Axis Bank Ltd. Ghaziabad No. B2-B3, Sector-16 Noida Aaacu2414K (Respondent) (Appellant)

section 201(1)/201(1A), raising a demand of Rs. 235,63,873/- for AY 2014-15 and Rs. 1,78,945/- for AY 2013-14. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee was not required to deduct any TDS u/s 194A

M/S DENA BANK,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result appeals filed by the appellant are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Tds) And Another Respondent :- Canara Bank Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar,Praveen Kumar Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. This appeal, which has been filed under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 19611 at the instance of the Department, was admitted on the following question of law : "(A) Whether the ITAT as well

M/S STATE BANK OF PATIALA,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result appeals filed by the appellant are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Tds) And Another Respondent :- Canara Bank Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar,Praveen Kumar Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. This appeal, which has been filed under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 19611 at the instance of the Department, was admitted on the following question of law : "(A) Whether the ITAT as well

JCIT(TDS), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri. Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS), assessee submitted that they are maintaining ‘Site Restoration Fund account’ in respect of ONGC Ltd., which is not a time deposit liable for deduction of tax. During the course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer has observed that deposit under STDR is not outside the purview of section 194A and accordingly, he had passed order under section 201(1

JCIT(TDS), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri. Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS), assessee submitted that they are maintaining ‘Site Restoration Fund account’ in respect of ONGC Ltd., which is not a time deposit liable for deduction of tax. During the course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer has observed that deposit under STDR is not outside the purview of section 194A and accordingly, he had passed order under section 201(1

JCIT(TDS), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri. Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS), assessee submitted that they are maintaining ‘Site Restoration Fund account’ in respect of ONGC Ltd., which is not a time deposit liable for deduction of tax. During the course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer has observed that deposit under STDR is not outside the purview of section 194A and accordingly, he had passed order under section 201(1

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS provisions in the case of residents and curb bogus payments. Moreover, though section 194J was inserted with effect from July 1, 1995, till the assessment year in question that is the assessment year 2005-06 both the Revenue and the assessee proceeded on the footing that section 194'J was not applicable to the Page 5 of 59 payment

VACHASPATI SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -4(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

section 194A of the I.T. Act. 11. Reliance has also placed on the following judgments :- 1. CIT, Faridabad vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) [29] 182 Taxman 368 (SC) 2. CIT, Rajkot Vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya [2014] 52 taxman.com 27 (SC) 3. Surjit Kumar Chetal Vs. CIT-XV [2017] 86 taxmann.com 121 (Delhi) 4. Movaliya Bhikhubhai Balabhai v. ITO [2016] 70 taxmann.com

ACIT, TDS, NOIDA vs. M/S ST MICROELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs. St Microelectronics Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Tds, Noida Plot No. 11, Knoledge Park-111, Greater Noida Gir/Pan : Aaacs3406M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. K.V.S.R. Krishna, Ca Date Of Hearing 19.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 10.06.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 19/07/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Noida For Assessment Year 2007-08 Raising Following Grounds: “That Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Directing To Delete The Order U/S 201(1)/201(1A) Of The I.T. Act Passed By The Assessing Officer Ignoring The Fact That Assessee Must Follow The Mercantile System Of Accounting For These Payments & Erred In Further Allowing The Assessee To Follow The Cash System Of Accounting For These Payments Solely On The Grund Of Sap Environment Being Followed By The Assessee.” 2. The Facts In Brief Are That During Tax Deducted At Source (Tds) Verification By The Tds Assessing Officer, It Was Observed That Tax Was Not Deducted On Certain Expenses Debited In Profit & Loss. The Assessing Officer Called For The Tax Audit Report In Form No. 3 Cd & Observed That The Auditor Had Also Pointed

TDS u/s. 194A on interest payable by banks. The relevant portion of the said circular is reproduced as under: “As per provisions of section 194A of the Income Tax Act 1961, income tax has to be deducted at source at the time of credit of interest income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof

DCIT (TDS), DEHRADUN vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 38/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs State Bank Of India, Tax(Tds), Tel Bhawan, Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Mrtuo0659B Assessee By : Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2014 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun.

194A mandates the payer of interest to deduct TDS at the time of credit of such interest to the account of the payee. However, by virtue of sub-section (3), provisions of sub-section (1

DCIT (TDS), DEHRADUN vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Joginder Singh, Jm Ita No. 4458/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs State Bank Of India, Tax(Tds), Tel Bhawan, Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Mrts02193C Assessee By : Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 27.05.2016 By Ld. Cit(A), Dehradun.

194A mandates the payer of interest to deduct TDS at the time of credit of such interest to the account of the payee. However, by virtue of sub-section (3), provisions of sub-section (1

ACE DATAMATICS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-73(1), NEW DELHI

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

1) and Rs 4,65,951 under section 201(1A) is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and the demand deserves to be quashed. 5. The action of the learned CIT(A) in holding that 10 percent TDS should have been deducted under section 194A