YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

TDS statements, even if the said statements are belated, is not empowered to charge the fees under section 234E of the Act. The amendment was brought in by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and such an amendment where empowerment is given to the Assessing Officer to levy or charge the fees cannot be said to be clarificatory in nature

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

TDS statements, even if the said statements are belated, is not empowered to charge the fees under section 234E of the Act. The amendment was brought in by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and such an amendment where empowerment is given to the Assessing Officer to levy or charge the fees cannot be said to be clarificatory in nature

SERCO INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shrianil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

31-03-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27-06-2023 O R D E R Per N. K. Choudhry, Judicial Member: The Assessee/Appellant herein has preferred this appeal against the order dated 22-12-2015 impugned herein passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4 (10), Gurgaon/ Ld. Assessing Officer {in short „Ld. AO‟} under sections 143(3) read with

ADDITIONAL DIGP,GURGAON vs. DCIT, TDS, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS/ TCS statements/ returns even for the period prior to 01-06-2015 21.1 So far as the argument of the Ld. DR on the basis of various decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Biswajit Das (supra) that provisions of section 234E are constitutionally valid is concerned, no doubt the provisions

M/S. SAMIKARAN LEARNING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

TDS statements, even if the said statements are belated, is not empowered to charge the fees under section 234E of the Act. The amendment was brought in by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and such an amendment where empowerment is given to the Assessing Officer to levy or charge the fees cannot be said to be clarificatory in nature

M/S. SAMIKARAN LEARNING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

TDS statements, even if the said statements are belated, is not empowered to charge the fees under section 234E of the Act. The amendment was brought in by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and such an amendment where empowerment is given to the Assessing Officer to levy or charge the fees cannot be said to be clarificatory in nature

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS Officer vide order dated March 30, 2012 rejected all the contentions of the assessee and proceeded to saddle the demand of Rs. 8,39,81,641 under section 201(1) of the Act. Rs. 6,58,05,970 and under section 201(1 A) of Rs. 81.75,671, respectively. 6. Being aggrieved by the above order of the Assessing

M/S SPEARSEARCH SOLUTIONS,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara\Nand\Nshri S. Rifaur Rahman\Nita No.3216/Del/2025\N Assessment Year: 2014-15\Nm/S. Spearsearch Solutions,\Nf-4 & 5, Street No. 3, Near\Nnathu Sweets, Laxmi Nagar,\Nvikas Marg,\Nnew Delhi\Npan: Abofs7069J\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Nincome Tax Officer,\Nward-77(3),\Nnew Delhi\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\Ndepartment By\Nsh. P.D. Mittal, Ca\Nsh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N25.09.2025\N25.09.2025\Norder\Nper Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm\Nthis Assessee'S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15, Arises\Nagainst The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./Jcit(A)-\N1, Mumbai'S Din & Order No.\Nitba/Apl/S/250/2024-\N25/1074646000(1), Dated 18.03.2025 Involving Proceedings Under\Nsection 201 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As\N'The Act').\N2.\Nheard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.\Ncoming To The Assessee'S Sole Substantive Ground That Both\Nthe Learned Lower Authorities Herein Have Erred In Law & On Facts\Nin Treating It As The Assessee In Default In Section 201(1)\Nproceedings We Note At The Outset That The Lower Appellate\Ndiscussion To This Effect Reads As Under:\N“Submission- The Submission Of The Assessee Is Reproduced As Under:\Nsub: Response To Notice U/S 250 Vide Din: Itba/Nfac/F/Apl\N1/2022-23/1050402744(1) Dated 04.03.2023 In Case Of M/S\Nspearsearch Solutions (Pan: Abofs7069] & Tan: Dels389078), F4\N& 5. 1 Fluor.

31-March,\n2014 was paid to M/s Best Infosystems Ltd after deducting TIG 1940\n(Work Contracts) @ 2% for FY 2013-14.\nProvisions of TDS u/s 194] Payment to Contractors, under Income Tax\nAct, 1961\n194]. (1) Апу person, not being an individual or a Hindu undivided\nfamily, who is responsible for paying to a resident

KGL NETWORK (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 14(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 133(6) from ITO, TDS, Ward- (International Taxation), Dated 17.02.2010 along with submissions of the assessee-company and details, in which, the assessee-company similarly explained that assessee-company handled Cargo imported by Indian manufacturer, for which, freight is paid and assessee-company is not liable to deduct TDS. No action have been taken by the Department against

NOKIA INDIA SALES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7244/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 807, New Delhi House, Special Range-6, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn9141L Assessee By : Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surenderpal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

Section 40(a)(ia) such expenditure would have been allowed as deduction in the hands of assessee only if they have deducted TDS on the said payments. Since there was a failure on part of NISPL to deduct TDS disallowance of Rs. 58,31

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

31,76,79,386/-. Your AMP expense as a percentage of total operating expense works out to 42%. Thus, 42% of this BPG amount is taken as compensation that you have already ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 received in this regard for carrying out the AMP function. This works out to Rs. 13,51,90,865/-. After granting such

ACIT, CC- 31, NEW DELHI vs. PERNOD RICHARD INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

31,76,79,386/-. Your AMP expense as a percentage of total operating expense works out to 42%. Thus, 42% of this BPG amount is taken as compensation that you have already ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 received in this regard for carrying out the AMP function. This works out to Rs. 13,51,90,865/-. After granting such

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

31,76,79,386/-. Your AMP expense as a percentage of total operating expense works out to 42%. Thus, 42% of this BPG amount is taken as compensation that you have already ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 received in this regard for carrying out the AMP function. This works out to Rs. 13,51,90,865/-. After granting such

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

31,76,79,386/-. Your AMP expense as a percentage of total operating expense works out to 42%. Thus, 42% of this BPG amount is taken as compensation that you have already ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 received in this regard for carrying out the AMP function. This works out to Rs. 13,51,90,865/-. After granting such

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)

31. The object of introducing section 40(a)(ia), as explained in the Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular No. 5, dated July 15, 2005—See [2005] 276 ITR (St.) 151), is to augment compliance with the TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS returns. Hence, she submitted that the TAN jurisdiction being Delhi the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court would be applicable. 31 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 Rejoinder by the Counsel of the Assessee 29. In his rejoinder, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission filed on 29.07.2019 and brought

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS returns. Hence, she submitted that the TAN jurisdiction being Delhi the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court would be applicable. 31 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 Rejoinder by the Counsel of the Assessee 29. In his rejoinder, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission filed on 29.07.2019 and brought

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS returns. Hence, she submitted that the TAN jurisdiction being Delhi the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court would be applicable. 31 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 Rejoinder by the Counsel of the Assessee 29. In his rejoinder, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission filed on 29.07.2019 and brought