INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

section share) 56(2))(viib) read with 302,94,20,917/- 272,03,82,220 286,85,63,149 Explanation a(ii) and applied valuation as Total Assets per Rule 11UA. (A) However , while applying Rule 11UA the learned AO failed to apply the complete TDS payable 43

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

section share) 56(2))(viib) read with 302,94,20,917/- 272,03,82,220 286,85,63,149 Explanation a(ii) and applied valuation as Total Assets per Rule 11UA. (A) However , while applying Rule 11UA the learned AO failed to apply the complete TDS payable 43

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

43. It was submitted on behalf of the assessees during the hearing and not disputed by the revenue, that this issue was decided and covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v Telsuo Mitera, decided on 17-5-2012, in ITA 323/2010. In that decision, the following question arose for consideration: “2. The question/issue raised in the present

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

43. It was submitted on behalf of the assessees during the hearing and not disputed by the revenue, that this issue was decided and covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v Telsuo Mitera, decided on 17-5-2012, in ITA 323/2010. In that decision, the following question arose for consideration: “2. The question/issue raised in the present

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

43. It was submitted on behalf of the assessees during the hearing and not disputed by the revenue, that this issue was decided and covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v Telsuo Mitera, decided on 17-5-2012, in ITA 323/2010. In that decision, the following question arose for consideration: “2. The question/issue raised in the present

VIJAY SINGH CHAUHAN,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-2(5), NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishravijay Singh Chauhan, Income Tax Officer, House No.-193, Gali No.-3, Vs. Ward- 2(5), Noida, Village Chhalera, Sector-44, Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh India. India. Pan No: Aeipc4637E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Naveen Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.09.2025 Order Per Sudhir Pareek, Jm: The Aforetitled Appeal Has Been Preferred Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter, In Short, ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 17.07.2023 For Ay 2015-16, By Which Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed.

TDS-1, Surat [2016] 70 taxmann.com 45 (Gujrat). 8. Per Contra, the Learned DR relying upon the orders passed by the both authorities below, submitted that the Legislature introduced the provisions of section 56(2)(viii) vide an amendment, by the Finance Act, 2009, w.e.f. 01/04/2010, and inserted “income by way of interest received on compensation or on enhanced compensation

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC., DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit, Halliburton Offshore Services International Taxation, Inc. , Vs. 13-A,Subhash Road, C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, Aayakar Bhawan, 75/7, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan:Aaach5154M (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Addl. Cit, Inc. , International Taxation, Vs. C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, Subhash Road, Suite-4A, Plaza M-6, Jasola, Dehradun New Delhi Pan:Aaach5154M (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. , Adit, C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, International Taxation, Vs. Suite-4A, Plaza M-6, Jasola, 13-A,Subhash Road, New Delhi Aayakar Bhawan, Pan:Aaach5154M Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. Vs Ddit (International Taxation)

43. 1527 Supply supervision and installation of software which is used for analysis of flow rate of mineral oil to determine reservoir conditions. 44. 1523 Supply, installation and familiarization of software for processing seismic data. The above facts would indicate that the pith and substance of each of the contracts/agreements is inextricably connected with prospecting, extraction or production of mineral

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SCORPION COURAGEOUS LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

TDS) under Section 195(2) or 195(3) either by the non-resident or by the resident payer is to avoid any future hassles for both resident as well as non resident. In our view, Sections 195(2) and 195(3) are safeguards. The said provisions are of practical importance. This reasoning of ours is based on the decision

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

TDS under section 194C and in view of assessee’s failure to deduct tax at source under the aforesaid section, the entire purchases aggregating to Rs. 5.063.OK crores made from the aforesaid vendors was disallowable under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The Ld. AR submitted that the aforesaid issue is squarely covered by the decision of Delhi

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-11, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

TDS on legal and professional charges amounting to Rs.3.81 Lacs, it is seen that during the relevant year, the assessee incurred legal and professional expenses, amounting to Rs. 3,81,006/-. The details of said expenses were submitted before the authorities. The Assessing Officer disallowed the aforesaid expenses, invoking section 40(a)(ia), for the failure of the assessee

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPL. RANGE-6, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

43) of the Act would also cover additional income tax levied u/s. 115-O(2) of the Act. He submitted that section 115-O(2) of the Act provides 17 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. that tax on distributed profits i.e. dividend shall be payable, notwithstanding that no income tax is payable by the domestic company

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

43) of the Act would also cover additional income tax levied u/s. 115-O(2) of the Act. He submitted that section 115-O(2) of the Act provides 17 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. that tax on distributed profits i.e. dividend shall be payable, notwithstanding that no income tax is payable by the domestic company

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

43) of the Act would also cover additional income tax levied u/s. 115-O(2) of the Act. He submitted that section 115-O(2) of the Act provides 17 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. that tax on distributed profits i.e. dividend shall be payable, notwithstanding that no income tax is payable by the domestic company

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

43) of the Act would also cover additional income tax levied u/s. 115-O(2) of the Act. He submitted that section 115-O(2) of the Act provides 17 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. that tax on distributed profits i.e. dividend shall be payable, notwithstanding that no income tax is payable by the domestic company

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

43) of the Act would also cover additional income tax levied u/s. 115-O(2) of the Act. He submitted that section 115-O(2) of the Act provides 17 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. that tax on distributed profits i.e. dividend shall be payable, notwithstanding that no income tax is payable by the domestic company

KUNSHAN Q TECH MICROELECTRONICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, DELHI

43,56,141/- vide order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.10.2024 as against the returned loss of Rs. 98,71,60,760/- and thereby making erroneous additions of Rs. 4,44,75,24,909/-.\n3. That on the facts, law and in the circumstances of the case, the orders so framed

RATHI SUPER STEEL LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

TDS) to compute tax @10% as prescribed by the DTAA, hence invoking Section 200A of the Act is not warranted in the case of the assessee. CBDT NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2196(E) DATED 24.6.2016 S.O. 2196 (E).— In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (ii) of sub-section (7)of section 206AA, read with section 295 of the Income

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

43,08,839 under section 1l5JB of the Act. Re: Transfer Pricing Adjustment under section 92CA relating to inter unit transfer 2. That the assessing officer/ Transfer Pricing Officer („TPO‟) erred on facts and in law in partly disallowing claim of deduction under section 80IC to the extent of Rs.2,20,89,180 by reducing profits of the eligible undertaking