PERMALI WALLACE PVT. LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS under that section arises only if the assessee pays or credits “any sum chargeable under the provisions of this act”. Thereafter, he carried us to section 9(1)(i) which prescribes the chargeability/taxability of ‘business income’ in India. He submitted that in the present case, section 9(1)(i) is not applicable for the certain reasons, namely

PERMALI WALLACE PVT. LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS under that section arises only if the assessee pays or credits “any sum chargeable under the provisions of this act”. Thereafter, he carried us to section 9(1)(i) which prescribes the chargeability/taxability of ‘business income’ in India. He submitted that in the present case, section 9(1)(i) is not applicable for the certain reasons, namely

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS

DCIT CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133(6) of the Act. The lenders confirmed their transactions. It appears from the documents that the amounts were borrowed by the appellant for business purposes and interest was paid and TDS

DY. CIT -1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO in the present proceedings were also served on this address which were also duly complied by both these lender companies. 8.4 It is seen that this issue was also raised by the then AO i.e. DCIT1(1) while recording the statement of Mr. Deepak Kalani

M/S AD-MANUM FINANCE LTD.,INDORE vs. THEDCIT 1(1) , INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO in the present proceedings were also served on this address which were also duly complied by both these lender companies. 8.4 It is seen that this issue was also raised by the then AO i.e. DCIT1(1) while recording the statement of Mr. Deepak Kalani

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AVILABLE FINANCE LTD., INDORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the AO in the present proceedings were also served on this address which were also duly complied by both these lender companies. 8.4 It is seen that this issue was also raised by the then AO i.e. DCIT1(1) while recording the statement of Mr. Deepak Kalani

HERSHEY INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING) , BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

section 133 (6) of the Act. Accordingly, the TDS Officer held that assessee was liable to deduct tax at source

HERSHEY INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING) , BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

section 133 (6) of the Act. Accordingly, the TDS Officer held that assessee was liable to deduct tax at source

MAAN ALUMINIUM LTD.,PITHAMPUR vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Maan Aluminium Ltd. Ito (It & Tp), 427, Orbit Mall, Bhopal बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Ab Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aapcm 0088 C / Tan: Bplm 07361 E Assessee By Shri Sudhir Padliya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

TDS under that section arises only if the income of non-resident is chargeable to tax in India. Then, Ld. AR carried us to section 9 and submitted that this is the only section which fixes chargeability in India. Ld. AR submitted that in the present case, section 9 is not applicable for following reasons: Page 4 of 9 Maan

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAJEEV AJMERA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

TDS and subsequent has filed their return of income. Amounts could not be disallowed. (3) ITO vs. Nam Estates (P) Ltd. (2013) 141 ITD 659 Bang, 21 ITR (Trib) 109 Bang Expenses on commission and brokerage charges on which tax deducted at source and remitted to the treasury were genuine and allowed the same. (4) CIT vs. Gopaldas Estate Housing

M/S SANGHVI FOODS P LTD, ,INDORE vs. ITO (IT & TP) , BHOPAL

In the result common issue raised in

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

TDS u/s 133(6) to the said party, it was categorically mentioned that customers enquiry received by it is forwarded to Buhler AG (Principal) and Quotation from Buhler AG (Principal) to prospective customers. The Indian counterpart has no Authority to conclude the contract on its own and therefore the Bulher AG has no business connection in India

M/S SANGHVI FOODS P LTD, ,INDORE vs. ITO (IT & TP) , BHOPAL

In the result common issue raised in

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

TDS u/s 133(6) to the said party, it was categorically mentioned that customers enquiry received by it is forwarded to Buhler AG (Principal) and Quotation from Buhler AG (Principal) to prospective customers. The Indian counterpart has no Authority to conclude the contract on its own and therefore the Bulher AG has no business connection in India

THE ACIT ,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

133(6) of the Act by the AO were duly complied and represented before the AO during the assessment proceedings. This fact has also not been controverted by the ld.CIT-DR. From the assessment order, we observe that the main allegation of the AO was that the assessee has incurred only losses on NMCE which are artificial losses through synchronized

THE ADDL. CIT RANGE -1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

133(6) of the Act by the AO were duly complied and represented before the AO during the assessment proceedings. This fact has also not been controverted by the ld.CIT-DR. From the assessment order, we observe that the main allegation of the AO was that the assessee has incurred only losses on NMCE which are artificial losses through synchronized

THE ACIT,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

133(6) of the Act by the AO were duly complied and represented before the AO during the assessment proceedings. This fact has also not been controverted by the ld.CIT-DR. From the assessment order, we observe that the main allegation of the AO was that the assessee has incurred only losses on NMCE which are artificial losses through synchronized

M/S. BHANDARI HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhandari Hospital & Pr. Cit-(I) Research Centre, Gf-21 & Indore बनाम/ 22, Opp. Meghdoot Garden, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aadfb8151A

TDS deposited was duly filed (page 115-116 of the paper book). It was categorically informed to the AO that details are enclosed at pg no. 750-764 of the said reply and copy of form 26AS is enclosed. ( bottom of page 115 reverse side of paper book). [ITA No.355/Ind/2017] [Bhandari Hospital & Research Centre] xvi. Details of all additions