ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

TDS in AY 2014-15. 7. We take up the assessee’s appeal first. 8. Ground No. 1 in both the years is of general nature not requiring adjudication. 9. Ground No. 2 to 5 and Ground No. 2 & 3 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance on account of exchange rate fluctuation

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

TDS in AY 2014-15. 7. We take up the assessee’s appeal first. 8. Ground No. 1 in both the years is of general nature not requiring adjudication. 9. Ground No. 2 to 5 and Ground No. 2 & 3 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance on account of exchange rate fluctuation

M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

TDS in AY 2014-15. 7. We take up the assessee’s appeal first. 8. Ground No. 1 in both the years is of general nature not requiring adjudication. 9. Ground No. 2 to 5 and Ground No. 2 & 3 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance on account of exchange rate fluctuation

CANON INDIA PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal for A

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2012-13 & A.Y. 2013-14 Canon India Pvt.Ltd. Acit, Circle 5(2) 7Th Floor, Tower B Vs. New Delhi Building No.5 Dlf Epitome Dlf Phase Iii Gurgaon

TDS under section 195 of the Act on such reimbursements, and consequently made disallowance under section 40 (a) (i) of the Act. ITA 1672/Del/2017 AY 2012-13 ITA 6742/Del/17 AY 2013-14 Canon India P.Ltd. vs. ACIT 19. Ld.AR thereafter, took us through paper book and submitted that employees from Cannon Inc., (being Overseas entity) were seconded at request

CANON INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 5(2), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal for A

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2012-13 & A.Y. 2013-14 Canon India Pvt.Ltd. Acit, Circle 5(2) 7Th Floor, Tower B Vs. New Delhi Building No.5 Dlf Epitome Dlf Phase Iii Gurgaon

TDS under section 195 of the Act on such reimbursements, and consequently made disallowance under section 40 (a) (i) of the Act. ITA 1672/Del/2017 AY 2012-13 ITA 6742/Del/17 AY 2013-14 Canon India P.Ltd. vs. ACIT 19. Ld.AR thereafter, took us through paper book and submitted that employees from Cannon Inc., (being Overseas entity) were seconded at request

POWERGRID RAMPUR SAMBHAL TRANSMISSION LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 20(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Section 143(1) order. The rectification\norder was passed on 02/05/2023 sustaining the disallowance of TDS credit of\nRs.5,62,438

M/S HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ACIT (TDS), NOIDA

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihcl Technologies Ltd, Acit(Tds), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14Th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida Pan: Aaach1645P (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS Statement had not been filed. However, section 201(3) of the Act as amended by Finance Act No.2 of 2014, as mentioned in the memorandum of the Finance Bill No.2 of 2014 is stated to have effect from 1st October, 2014. Thus, wherever the Parliament / Legislature wanted to make provisions applicable retrospectively, it has been so provided

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION

The Appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

438 11.10.2014 7,61,351/- 2 439 11.10.2014 6,64,797/- 3 480 07.11.2014 16,31,467/- 4 543 07.11.2014 16,31,467/- e. It is stated that the Defendant No.2 induced the Plaintiff to raise back-dated invoices and split the total outstanding amount in two parts, i.e. Rs.45,11,305/- and Rs.53,66,278/- totalling to Rs.98

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 201(1) even when the recipient has offered the receipts to tax. 11. The fact in this case is that, prima facie the assessee has defaulted in deducting the tax and at the same time, the recipient has offered the amounts received to tax which is not in dispute. Creating a demand for non-deduction of tax while

CIT vs. BONANZA PORTFOLIO LTD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

TDS, for short). 2. With regard to payment of SEBI registration charges, the tribunal has noticed the past history, including the litigation and the challenge made by share brokers to the said levy. Thereafter, the SEBI came out with a scheme called Securities and Exchange Board of lndia (lnterest, Liability, Regularization) Scheme, 2004, which was announced on 1Sth July

CIT vs. BONANZA PORTFOLIO LTD

Appeal is dismissed

TDS, for short). 2. With regard to payment of SEBI registration charges, the tribunal has noticed the past history, including the litigation and the challenge made by share brokers to the said levy. Thereafter, the SEBI came out with a scheme called Securities and Exchange Board of lndia (lnterest, Liability, Regularization) Scheme, 2004, which was announced on 1Sth July

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

TDS credit in the absence of any power of remand whereas the CIT(A) should have verified and allowed the claim himself. 15 That the AO has grossly erred in law and facts in charging interest under sections 2348, 234C and 234D of the Act. 16 That the AO has erred in law in initiating penalty proceedings under section

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

Section 92C(1) of the Income-tax Act. In view of the above, the decision of Hon‘ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nestle India Ltd. (supra) would support the case of the assessee rather than the Revenue. In view of the totality of above facts, we are unable to uphold the view of the TPO that

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

TDS Rs.712257/-; 18. Deletion of addition on account of reclassification of income from income from house property to income from business and profession.- Rs.9,40,52,455/-; 19. Deletion of addition on account of disallowance of notional rent/additional annual letting value in respect of the vacant property. - Rs. 12,28,340/-; 20. Deletion of addition on account of disallowance

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

TDS Rs.712257/-; 18. Deletion of addition on account of reclassification of income from income from house property to income from business and profession.- Rs.9,40,52,455/-; 19. Deletion of addition on account of disallowance of notional rent/additional annual letting value in respect of the vacant property. - Rs. 12,28,340/-; 20. Deletion of addition on account of disallowance

M/S. GENUS ELECTROTECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are decided as under:

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

438, read with section 36(1 )(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (Employees contribution) - Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), assessee

M/S. GENUS ELECTROTECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are decided as under:

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

438, read with section 36(1 )(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (Employees contribution) - Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), assessee

M/S. GENUS ELECTROTECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are decided as under:

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

438, read with section 36(1 )(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (Employees contribution) - Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), assessee