ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar, Am

205 of the Act comes into operation and the revenue is barred from recovering the TDS amount once again from the employee from whose income, TDS amount has been deducted. It is pertinent to note that the purpose of issuing TDS certificate under Section

MRINAL ROY,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1682/Del/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2009-10

205 of the Act comes into operation and the revenue is barred from recovering the TDS amount once again from the employee from whose income, TDS amount has been deducted. It is pertinent to note 4 that the purpose of issuing TDS certificate under Section

JOTINDRA STEEL AND TUBES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

TDS totalling to Rs.1,32,90,467/- not appearing in Form 26AS provided by appellant himself, credit of same could not be granted by Assessing Officer. 19. The appellant has drawn attention towards the provisions of section 205

JOTINDRA STEEL AND TUBES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

TDS totalling to Rs.1,32,90,467/- not appearing in Form 26AS provided by appellant himself, credit of same could not be granted by Assessing Officer. 19. The appellant has drawn attention towards the provisions of section 205

JOTINDRA STEEL AND TUBES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the second issue of AY 2017-18 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.3803 To 3805/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Jotindra Steel & Tubes Ltd., Vs Acit, 602, Chiranjiv Tower, Central Circle-3, 43, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aaacj1872C

TDS totalling to Rs.1,32,90,467/- not appearing in Form 26AS provided by appellant himself, credit of same could not be granted by Assessing Officer. 19. The appellant has drawn attention towards the provisions of section 205

MANISH TANDON ,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, as

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

TDS certificate issued by the employer in terms with section 203 of the Act. The provisions of section 205 can get triggered

ACIT, DELHI vs. M/S. THE INDIAN NEWS PAPER SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS Officer was passed on March 29,2012, hence it was barred by a period of limitation as per the above provisions of the Act which cannot be extended by the courts. In this regard, counsel for the assesses has placed his reliance on the judgment in the case of Hope Textiles Ltd. v. Union of India [1994] 205

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ALNOOR EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 4595/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, M/S. Alnoor Exports, बनाम C/O. M/S. Rohit Malik & Vs. Associates, Circle : 32 (1) 1403, Chiranjeev Tower, New Delhi. 43 - Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Pan No. Aacfa2599N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Respondent

TDS under section 195 of the Act. On appeal the ld. CIT (Appeals) deleted the disallowance. 5. The ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. No. 4595/Del/2015 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals). He also placed reliance on the decision of the Delhi Bench

VINOD KUMAR MOURYA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRECLE

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

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS so deducted has not been deposited by the Koutons Group with the state exchequer. 11. Legislative intent of sections 195 and 205

VINOD KUMAR MOURYA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE

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

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS so deducted has not been deposited by the Koutons Group with the state exchequer. 11. Legislative intent of sections 195 and 205

M/S. RAJINDER KUMAR AGGARWAL (HUF),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13

section 40(a)(i) observing as under: “7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The issues involved in this appeal relates to applicability of TDS u/s 195 on payments abroad of export commission to non-resident the foreign agent for the procurement of export orders for the assessee and consequently disallowance

SANJAY GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 70(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Ld

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmasanjay Gupta, Vs. Ito, 402, Mahagun Mosaic Phase-1, Ward-70(1), Sector-4, Sahibabad, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan : Aaepg2995G (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS to the govt.’s A/c. by EIEL being Senior Vice President (Finance) in EIEL as he had knowledge and control over financial system of EIEL.” 4. Heard and perused the record. 5. Ld. Counsel representing the assessee submitted that Section 205

MANI MADHUKAR BANSAL,TELANGANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- INT. TAX 1(1)(2), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

TDS not deposited of prize money payable to the petitioner. It held and observed that a perusal of section 205

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

TDS under section 194C of the Act. 39.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 194C of the Act were not applicable in relation to the aforesaid transactions, as the same were in the nature of contract of sale. 39.3 That the assessing officer erred on facts

FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LTD.,UNITED KINDGOM vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

TDS amount in respect of RPC fees paid in all the assessment years under dispute which are in addition to the taxes already paid by the assessee on such income. Thus, he submitted, as per the statutory principle laid down under section 205

FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LTD.,UNITED KINDGOM vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

TDS amount in respect of RPC fees paid in all the assessment years under dispute which are in addition to the taxes already paid by the assessee on such income. Thus, he submitted, as per the statutory principle laid down under section 205

FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LTD.,UNITED KINDGOM vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

TDS amount in respect of RPC fees paid in all the assessment years under dispute which are in addition to the taxes already paid by the assessee on such income. Thus, he submitted, as per the statutory principle laid down under section 205

RAJAT MAKAN,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

205 2490/- in the profit and loss account, is liable to deduct TDS on such payments under the provisions of section