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

68 taxmann.com 231 and CIT vs. Kotak Securities Limited 67 taxmann.com 356. Ground No.3 - No TDS demand can be raised under section 201(1) of the Act. 3.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the learned TDS Officer, as upheld by learned

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

68 taxmann.com 231 and CIT vs. Kotak Securities Limited 67 taxmann.com 356. Ground No.3 - No TDS demand can be raised under section 201(1) of the Act. 3.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the learned TDS Officer, as upheld by learned

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

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68 taxmann.com 231 and CIT vs. Kotak Securities Limited 67 taxmann.com 356. Ground No.3 - No TDS demand can be raised under section 201(1) of the Act. 3.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the learned TDS Officer, as upheld by learned

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)

68 taxmann.com 129 (Kol) j. Brijgopal MadhusudanBhattad vs. ITO: 155 ITD 90 (Nag.) k. RKP Company vs. ITO: 1TA No: 106/RPR/2Q16 (Raipur) l. Shiv Krupa Tin Containers vs. ITO: ITA No. 136/Ahd/2016 (Ahd) v) Thus, without prejudice to the contention that no tax was deductible at source by the appellant under section 194H

M/S. CSN ESTATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

68 of the IT Act. 4. The authorities below have acted arbitrarily and without any reasonable in holding the payment of Rs. 50,00,000/- made for facilitating possession of land as part of the business activity as the payment made in contravention of the provisions of section 194H

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

68,93,84,224/-, on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 13. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed by the Appellant on the ground that sufficient opportunity was granted to the Appellant during the course of assessment proceedings to show-cause

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

68,93,84,224/-, on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 13. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed by the Appellant on the ground that sufficient opportunity was granted to the Appellant during the course of assessment proceedings to show-cause

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

68,93,84,224/-, on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 13. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed by the Appellant on the ground that sufficient opportunity was granted to the Appellant during the course of assessment proceedings to show-cause

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

68,93,84,224/-, on account of non-deduction of tax at source under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 13. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed by the Appellant on the ground that sufficient opportunity was granted to the Appellant during the course of assessment proceedings to show-cause

M/S BHARTI HEXACOM LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and department’s appeal dismissed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra: & Shri A.T. Varkey:

194H as well as provisions of section 194J are not attracted and therefore, there was no amount on which tax was deductible. Therefore, section 40(a)(ia) cannot come into play. The machinery provisions cannot operate independently and before the computation provisions contained in section 40(a)(ia) can come into the play, the effect of applicability

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

194H of the Act. 15. In this regard, the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT New Delhi in the case of the assessee held as under:- “The first contention of the assessee that Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kotak Securities Ltd 340 ITR 333 has held that disallowance

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PARAGON XT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2010-11

194H, section 1941, section 194J, section 194K, section 195, section 196A, section 196B, section 196C and section 196D to be treated as an income received. The purpose of section 198 is not to carve out an exception to section 145 of the Act. Section

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

194H of the Act. 9.3 Without prejudice, that the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that since the appellant was under a bona fide belief that no tax was required to be deducted therefrom, no disallowance was warranted under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9.4 Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

68,081/- under section 40(a)(ia), on the ground that the appellant failed to deduct tax at source therefrom under section 194J of the Act. 22.1. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in treating reimbursement of conveyance expenses as legal and professional expenses. 22.2. That the assessing officer erred on fact

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

194H of the Act. 16. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing expenditure of Rs. 1,56,12,424 incurred by way of payment to FX Enterprises Solutions Pvt Ltd., towards reimbursement of cost of gifts distributed to customers, on the ground that aforesaid payments were made under a contract for carrying out work

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

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

194H of the Act. The learned counsel 5 ITA Nos. 910 to 914/Del./2015 submitted that Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana has upheld the above order of the Tribunal on the ground that there was no relationship of the principal and agent between the assessee and the retailers and thus, the amount reimbursed were

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

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

194H of the Act. The learned counsel 5 ITA Nos. 910 to 914/Del./2015 submitted that Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana has upheld the above order of the Tribunal on the ground that there was no relationship of the principal and agent between the assessee and the retailers and thus, the amount reimbursed were

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

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

194H of the Act. The learned counsel 5 ITA Nos. 910 to 914/Del./2015 submitted that Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana has upheld the above order of the Tribunal on the ground that there was no relationship of the principal and agent between the assessee and the retailers and thus, the amount reimbursed were