JOHNSON WATCH COMPANY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-75(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2011-12 Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, L-21, Connaught Place, Circle-75(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcj9807G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.01.2020 Of The Cit(A)-38, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Years 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:- “1. That The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) Is Bad In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Order Of Ao In Respect Of Following Demands U/S 201(1) & U/S 201(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961:- Tds Demand Total Dlf Utilities Ambience Facilities Ambience Facilities Ltd. Management Private Services Private Limited Limited

26A u/s 201(1) r/w rule 31ACB and Rs. 18,511/- in respect of interest on short deduction by applying section 1941 instead of section 194C. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, modify, alter, substitute or delete any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that

SATYA KIRAN HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,SONIPAT vs. ITO WARD - TDS, ROHTAL

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.9143 & 9144/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2017-18 & 2019-20 बनाम Satya Kiran Healthcare Private Ltd., Ito, Near Pwd House, Atlas Road, Vs. Ward-Tds, Sonipat, Haryana. Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aabcs7978K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

26A, to this affect has been given. The assesses has also contended that as per the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act, the onus was on the AO who had alleged failure on part of the deductor. Thus, I.T.A.Nos.9143 & 9144/Del/2019 additional evidence in the regard was furnished. The assesses has relied on tee circular of CBDT

SATYA KIRAN HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,SONIPAT vs. ITO WARD - TDS, ROHTAL

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.9143 & 9144/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2017-18 & 2019-20 बनाम Satya Kiran Healthcare Private Ltd., Ito, Near Pwd House, Atlas Road, Vs. Ward-Tds, Sonipat, Haryana. Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aabcs7978K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

26A, to this affect has been given. The assesses has also contended that as per the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act, the onus was on the AO who had alleged failure on part of the deductor. Thus, I.T.A.Nos.9143 & 9144/Del/2019 additional evidence in the regard was furnished. The assesses has relied on tee circular of CBDT

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 45(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2014-15 Shri Santosh Kumar Singh, Vs. Acit, Circle-45(1) A-25, 1St Floor, New Delhi. Rajouri Garden, New Delhi – 110 027 Pan Aqbps2817E (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS as per provisions of section 194A of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee was asked to file the Accountant's Certificate prescribed as Form 26A

BOSE CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 73 (1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 2003/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2004/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 1St Floor, Tower-A, Building No. 10, Circle-73(1), Dlf Cyber City, Dlf Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110092 Gurugram, Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb3260A Assessee By : Dr. Sashwat Bajpai, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Poojan Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Instant Two Appeals Ita Nos. 2003 & 2004/Del/2024, For Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2016-17, Arise Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Bengaluru’S Common Orders Dated 29.02.2024 In Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023- 24/1061748591(1) & In Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1061768679(1), In Proceedings U/S 201(1A) & 201 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

section 201 shall be furnished in Form 26A to the Director General of Income-tax (Systems) or the person authorized by the Director General of Income-tax (Systems) in accordance with the procedures, formats and standards specified ITA Nos. 2003 & 2004/Del/2024 8 Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. under sub-rule (2), and verified in accordance with the procedures, formats

BOSE CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 73 (1), NEW DELHI , NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 2003/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2004/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 1St Floor, Tower-A, Building No. 10, Circle-73(1), Dlf Cyber City, Dlf Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110092 Gurugram, Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb3260A Assessee By : Dr. Sashwat Bajpai, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Poojan Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Instant Two Appeals Ita Nos. 2003 & 2004/Del/2024, For Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2016-17, Arise Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Bengaluru’S Common Orders Dated 29.02.2024 In Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023- 24/1061748591(1) & In Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1061768679(1), In Proceedings U/S 201(1A) & 201 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

section 201 shall be furnished in Form 26A to the Director General of Income-tax (Systems) or the person authorized by the Director General of Income-tax (Systems) in accordance with the procedures, formats and standards specified ITA Nos. 2003 & 2004/Del/2024 8 Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. under sub-rule (2), and verified in accordance with the procedures, formats

RAO KHEM CHAND VIDYA VIHAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,REWARI vs. ITO-TDS,ROHTAK, ROHTAK

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

TDS may be deemed an "assessee in default". The conjoint and harmonious reading of the Explanations to section 191 and 1st Proviso to section 201, the Deductor has to furnish a certificate under Page 9 of 11 ITA No. 3856/DEL/2024 [A.Y. 2016-17] Rao Khem Chand Vidya Vihar Shiksha Samiti Rule 31ACB of the Income Tax Rules in Form 26A

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS having regard to the provision of section 196 of the Act. 2.2 That the CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in holding the appellant to be 'assessee in default‟ u/s 201(1) for the alleged failure to deduct tax at source under section 194C of the Act from the amount of PSF- facilitation. 2.3 That

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS having regard to the provision of section 196 of the Act. 2.2 That the CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in holding the appellant to be 'assessee in default‟ u/s 201(1) for the alleged failure to deduct tax at source under section 194C of the Act from the amount of PSF- facilitation. 2.3 That

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS having regard to the provision of section 196 of the Act. 2.2 That the CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in holding the appellant to be 'assessee in default‟ u/s 201(1) for the alleged failure to deduct tax at source under section 194C of the Act from the amount of PSF- facilitation. 2.3 That

MALHAN CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 6(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

26A in accordance with the proviso to Section 201(1) showing that the tax has been paid on this interest income earned by M/s. Mariya Leather and M/s Audi Finance.” 1.4 The reply of the assessee is considered on merits. The relevant provision of the section 40(a), prior to its amendment in the Finance Act, 2014, is reproduced

M/S INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15

26A. 5. The “Ld. CIT(A)” erred in facts and in law in upholding the levy of interest under section 201(1 A) of the Act on account of alleged short-deduction of taxes. That the above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company deducted TDS

MAYUR BATRA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

TDS under section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194A of the Act by ignoring its second proviso and further ignoring that the Appellant has satisfied the conditions prescribed in the first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 201 of the Act, whereby a certificate from an independent accountant issued in prescribed FORM No. 26A

STATE BANK OF INDIA ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE -77(1),, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Cit, Vs. State Bank Of India, Circle 77(1), Officer Administrative Deptt. Delhi Local Head Office,Ii, Sansad Mar, New Delhi-1100

section 201 on production of Form 26A before the AO as per law. The AO is directed to give an opportunity to the appellant to produce the same”. 5. On careful perusal of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), we do not see any infirmity in the ITA Nos.2316 to 2318/Del/2022 observations of the learned

STATE BANK OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 77(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Cit, Vs. State Bank Of India, Circle 77(1), Officer Administrative Deptt. Delhi Local Head Office,Ii, Sansad Mar, New Delhi-1100

section 201 on production of Form 26A before the AO as per law. The AO is directed to give an opportunity to the appellant to produce the same”. 5. On careful perusal of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), we do not see any infirmity in the ITA Nos.2316 to 2318/Del/2022 observations of the learned

ACIT, DELHI vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Cit, Vs. State Bank Of India, Circle 77(1), Officer Administrative Deptt. Delhi Local Head Office,Ii, Sansad Mar, New Delhi-1100

section 201 on production of Form 26A before the AO as per law. The AO is directed to give an opportunity to the appellant to produce the same”. 5. On careful perusal of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), we do not see any infirmity in the ITA Nos.2316 to 2318/Del/2022 observations of the learned

STATE BANK OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 77(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Cit, Vs. State Bank Of India, Circle 77(1), Officer Administrative Deptt. Delhi Local Head Office,Ii, Sansad Mar, New Delhi-1100

section 201 on production of Form 26A before the AO as per law. The AO is directed to give an opportunity to the appellant to produce the same”. 5. On careful perusal of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), we do not see any infirmity in the ITA Nos.2316 to 2318/Del/2022 observations of the learned

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AIR SHAGOON NETWORK PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2012-13 Acit M/S. Air Shagoon Network Pvt. Ltd. Circle-2(1) C-37, Hauz Khas New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 016 Pan Aaeca0868R Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS in terms of section 194C and therefore he has made disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). 3. Before the Ld. CIT (A), apart from making detail and submissions on merits, assessee, without prejudice submitted that the Air India has shown this amount as its income and has offered it for tax and therefore, in view of proviso to sub section

ITO WARD - 2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ALL CHECK DEALS INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaito, Vs. All Check Deals India Pvt. Ltd, Ward-2(2). 94, Meghdoot Building, Gf- New Delhi 12A, Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act the assessee shall be deemed to have applied that the TDS post obtaining 26A