YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

40. The reliance placed by the revenue on the judgment of the Patna High Court case of J.G. Keshwani(supra) is misplaced as the facts of that case were entirely different. There, the assessee held employment as director of the company and in terms of the compensation package, he was entitled to receive commission as a percentage

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

40. The reliance placed by the revenue on the judgment of the Patna High Court case of J.G. Keshwani(supra) is misplaced as the facts of that case were entirely different. There, the assessee held employment as director of the company and in terms of the compensation package, he was entitled to receive commission as a percentage

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

40. The reliance placed by the revenue on the judgment of the Patna High Court case of J.G. Keshwani(supra) is misplaced as the facts of that case were entirely different. There, the assessee held employment as director of the company and in terms of the compensation package, he was entitled to receive commission as a percentage

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -XIII vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

Section 40(a)(ia) is to ensure that TDS is deducted and paid. The object of introduction of Section 40

AVAYA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 466/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 202, Platina, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. Circle-1(1), C-59, G-Block, Bandra Kurla New Delhi Complex, Bandra(E), Mumabi, Maharashtra-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaeca3592N Assessee By : Sh. Kamal Sawhney, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surender Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2021

TDS & AS-26: 11. This ground relates to reconciliation of income credited to P&L account and in the amount reflected in AS-26. The ld. DRP held that the reconciliation is primary correct and directed the AO to verify and give effect which the AO failed to carry out. The AO is hereby directed to follow the directions given

M/S AT & T GLOBAL BETWORK SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2008-09] At &T Global Network Services [India] Vs. The Dy. C.I.T Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle Circle - 2 (1) 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L [A.Y 2008-09] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. At &T Global Network Services Circle 2(1) [India] Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Ms. Chinu Bhasin, Ca Department By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr

section 40(a)(i) cannot be invoked in the case of said payment. 32. The Special Auditors in their Audit Report have worked out particulars of payments in respect of which no TDS

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

TDS has been deducted at lesser rate. 15. That CIT(A) in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition/disallowance U/s 40(a)(ia) on account of freight charges paid to various/ different truck owner. The CIT(A) has also failed to appreciate that provision of Section

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

TDS has been deducted at lesser rate. 15. That CIT(A) in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition/disallowance U/s 40(a)(ia) on account of freight charges paid to various/ different truck owner. The CIT(A) has also failed to appreciate that provision of Section

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

TDS on these payments, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) are to be invoked. As per provisions of Section 40

ASSERTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

TDS under section 1941A while making payment to Logix Builders and Promoters Private Limited.\n\n(ii) That the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO rejecting the contention of the assessee that the provisions of section 1941A are not applicable and hence no disallowance under section 40

M/S ECORYS NEDERLANDS B.V.,,DELHI vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2011-12

TDS on salary as per provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Since the assessee failed to do so the AO disallowed

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act as the Assessee has already deducted TDS under section 192 of the Act and therefore

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PURI CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The premise of the claim is that TDS was deposited on 25.1.2005 i.e. during

M/S PURI CONSTRUCTION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The premise of the claim is that TDS was deposited on 25.1.2005 i.e. during

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The premise of the claim is that TDS was deposited on 25.1.2005 i.e. during

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FLORENTINE ESTATE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Central Circle-18, W-82A, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The premise of the claim is that TDS was deposited on 25.1.2005 i.e. during

M/S HONDA CARS IMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIOT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

Section 40(a) (i) of the Act regarding deduction of TDS has to be complied with. In other words if no TDS

LINKEDIN TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI -4 , DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

40(a)(ia), all payments made to residents without deduction of applicable TDS, but the quantum of disallowance was restricted to 30% of the payment. As far as parity of disallowance for payments without TDS, remained the same for non- residents and residents, the difference in the quantum of disallowance persisted: 100% for non-residents under Section