PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI vs. MITSUBISHI CORPORATION (INDIA) PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed against the

2 appended to Section 195 of the Act (which was inserted in the Act via FA 2012, albeit with effect from 01.04.1962) concluded that payments made by the respondent/assessee to its group companies were chargeable to tax in India and hence, the disallowance

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

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

2)(vilb) on this issue is not adjudicated since full facts are\nneeded for proper adjudication. In other words, this ground is dismissed as not\nadjudicated.\nTherefore, the addition of Rs.418,66,34,625 u/s.56(2)(viib) made by the\nFAO/NFAC is fully restored in its entirety by treating the Rectification Order\ndated 17th Jan 2020 passed u/s.154

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

disallowed. The Assessing officer observed that printing machines were highly sophisticated and computerized and could be operated and managed without employing more than two or three persons. The expenses incurred by the assessee with regard to Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were mainly payments made for purchase of ink and consumables. The workers employed in operating Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

disallowed. The Assessing officer observed that printing machines were highly sophisticated and computerized and could be operated and managed without employing more than two or three persons. The expenses incurred by the assessee with regard to Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were mainly payments made for purchase of ink and consumables. The workers employed in operating Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

disallowed. The Assessing officer observed that printing machines were highly sophisticated and computerized and could be operated and managed without employing more than two or three persons. The expenses incurred by the assessee with regard to Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were mainly payments made for purchase of ink and consumables. The workers employed in operating Unit Nos. 2 & 3 were

HINDUSTAN EPC COMPANY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshhindustan Epc Company Ltd, Vs. Acit, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Circle-11(2), Phase-Iii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafcm9606E Acit, Vs. Hindustan Epc Company Ltd, Circle-11(2), 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafcm9606E

2 to section 195(1) for treating the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on account of non deduction of tax at source from the commission payment to the non-resident and the consequential non-making of disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(2), NEW DELHI vs. HINDUSTAN EPC COMPANY LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshhindustan Epc Company Ltd, Vs. Acit, 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, Circle-11(2), Phase-Iii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafcm9606E Acit, Vs. Hindustan Epc Company Ltd, Circle-11(2), 239, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafcm9606E

2 to section 195(1) for treating the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on account of non deduction of tax at source from the commission payment to the non-resident and the consequential non-making of disallowance

THE HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the investment which did not yield exempt income during the relevant year and strategic investment ought to be excluded while computing the average value of investment in terms of the aforesaid clause. 3.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, expenditure

THE HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the investment which did not yield exempt income during the relevant year and strategic investment ought to be excluded while computing the average value of investment in terms of the aforesaid clause. 3.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, expenditure

THE HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the investment which did not yield exempt income during the relevant year and strategic investment ought to be excluded while computing the average value of investment in terms of the aforesaid clause. 3.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, expenditure

M/S. THE HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the investment which did not yield exempt income during the relevant year and strategic investment ought to be excluded while computing the average value of investment in terms of the aforesaid clause. 3.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, expenditure

SUNBEAM AUTO LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

2,31,97,600/- is disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 10.1 The assessee challenged the impugned disallowance of commission paid to the parties resident of USA for sale of its products by treating the payment of export commission as a payment for technical services and applying the provisions of section 195

SUNBEAM AUTO LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

2,31,97,600/- is disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 10.1 The assessee challenged the impugned disallowance of commission paid to the parties resident of USA for sale of its products by treating the payment of export commission as a payment for technical services and applying the provisions of section 195

ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUNBEAM AUTO PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Dble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Range-9, New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Addl. Cit Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Special Range-8, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Room No. 199A, New Delhi 110 017 C.R. Building, Pan Aabcs2948F New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. Vs. Dcit, S-323, Panchsheel Park, Circle-24(2) New Delhi 110 017 New Delhi. Pan Aabcs2948F (Appellant) (Respondent)

2,31,97,600/- is disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 10.1 The assessee challenged the impugned disallowance of commission paid to the parties resident of USA for sale of its products by treating the payment of export commission as a payment for technical services and applying the provisions of section 195

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

2,99,20,449/- on account of disallowance under section 40a(i) of the Act, for non- deduction of TDS under section 195

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, as ordered by the CIT(A) is as follows. S. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1. Direct expenditure concerning exempt income Nil 2. Interest expenditure not directly attributable to any particular income 36,85,740 3. ½% of average investments 62,11,454 Total 98,97,195

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, as ordered by the CIT(A) is as follows. S. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1. Direct expenditure concerning exempt income Nil 2. Interest expenditure not directly attributable to any particular income 36,85,740 3. ½% of average investments 62,11,454 Total 98,97,195