M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

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

139 (Del) that roaming service not involving human interference is not a technical service as contemplated under Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) and therefore not liable for TDS

SUCH MEDIA PUBLICATION P LTD ,CIT (A) NFAC DELHI vs. NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

139(1) of the IT Act. 5. The ITAT has relied upon Chekmate Services (P.) Ltd. (Supra), and its reasoning is entirely consistent with the law laid down in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. (supra). Therefore, no case is made to interfere with the AO, CIT (appeals), and ITAT decisions. 6. However, Ms Kamat submitted that Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. (Supra

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE CIT (TDS), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

139 (Del) that roaming service not involving human interference is not a technical service as contemplated under Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) and therefore not liable for TDS

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

139 (Del) that roaming service not involving human interference is not a technical service as contemplated under Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) and therefore not liable for TDS

SHRI JAGDISH KUMAR GULIA,BHOPAL vs. THRE ASSTT.DIRECTORE OF INCOME TAX ,CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

139(1) of the IT Act. 5. The ITAT has relied upon Chekmate Services (P.) Ltd. (Supra), and its reasoning is entirely consistent with the law laid down in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. (supra). Therefore, no case is made to interfere with the AO, CIT (appeals), and ITAT decisions. 6. However, Ms Kamat submitted that Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. (Supra

M/S DAULATARAM ENGINEERING SERVICES P.LTD,MANDIDEEP vs. THE ADIT/CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

139(1) of the IT Act. 5. The ITAT has relied upon Chekmate Services (P.) Ltd. (Supra), and its reasoning is entirely consistent with the law laid down in Checkmate Services Page 3 of 12 Daulataram Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. I.T.A. No. 244/Ind/2023 Assessment Year -2019-20 (P) Ltd. (supra). Therefore, no case is made to interfere with

HONOURABLE PACKAGING P LTD ,DHAR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of The Income Tax Return & Can It Be Disallowed In The 143(1).

tds (Tax 1422 1422 Double taxation Deducted at source) and tcs (Tax Collected at Source) 3 I.TA No. 348/IND/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No Honourable packaging P. Ltd. vs. DCIT Interest on 120 Nil Payment related delay payment of to indirect tax. taxes Delay 892 Nil Normal payment charges Business Expenditures 2.3. The CPC not considered the above facts

SHRI SURENDRA SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. THE JCIT-3, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS 2,62,79,228 14-09-2007 1,40,00,000 15-12-2007 5,00,00,000 15-12-2007 1,30,00,000 15-03-2008 1,63,00,000 18-09-2008 40,00,000 25-09-2008 17,00,000 27-09-2008 1,23,37,620 Total 13,76,16,848 11. That

HEMLATA PATEL,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DEWAS

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purpose

section 253 of\nthe income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act\nfor the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a\nsecond Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order\nbearing Number:-ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073139567 (1)\ndated 11.02.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the\nAct, which is herein after referred

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

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

139-140 Electronics Indore Vs. Complex Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: BPLI 00953 B Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. And Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These five (5) appeals by the assessee are directed against

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

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

139-140 Electronics Indore Vs. Complex Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: BPLI 00953 B Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. And Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These five (5) appeals by the assessee are directed against

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

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

139-140 Electronics Indore Vs. Complex Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: BPLI 00953 B Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. And Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These five (5) appeals by the assessee are directed against

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

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

139-140 Electronics Indore Vs. Complex Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: BPLI 00953 B Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. And Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These five (5) appeals by the assessee are directed against

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. JCIT TDS INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniidea Cellular Ltd. Jcit 139-140 Electronics Complex Indore Vs. Pardeshipura Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaacb 2100P Assessee By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

139-140 Electronics Complex Indore Vs. Pardeshipura Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAACB 2100P Assessee by Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. And Gagan Tiwari, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Simran Bhullar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2023 O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: This appeal by the Assesse is directed against order dated

MAHATMA GANDHI STATE INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPEMENT,ADHARTAL vs. ACIT TDS, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

139" ], "issues": "Whether the AO correctly applied Section 194J instead of Section 194C for TDS deduction and whether the assessee is eligible for benefits under the first proviso to Section 201(1

THE ITO-1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S FRIENDS ASSOCIATES, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniito-1(1) M/S Friends Associates Bhopal Shop No.32, G.T.B. Complex New Market, Vs. Bhopal

TDS while passing the order u/s 154 dated 14.02.2022. The Ld. CIT(A) has not disturbed the quantum of expenses which were considered by the AO for making disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). However since there was an amendment in the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) vide Finance Act 2014 to restrict the disallowance of expenses to 30% therefore

RNG CONSTRUCTION CO,INDRA NAGAR vs. DCIT-CPC, CPC-BENGALURU

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshirng Construction Co. Dcit-Cpc बनाम/ 14, Sector-A, Vs. Indira Nagar, Mandideep (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqfr9084B Assessee By Shri Yashwant Sharma, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025

139 declaring a total income of Rs. 18,99,830/-. (ii) The AO selected assessee’s case for scrutiny assessment through notice bearing DIN: ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2019-20/1018227329(1) dated 23.09.2019 u/s 143(2) which culminated into assessment- order dated 20.04.2021 at a total income of Rs. 30,61,269/- after making two additions, namely (a) addition

JAGDISH SOLANKI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER JHABUA, JHABUA

Appeal is dismissed

139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 within prescribed time limit. It is also evident that the appellant had deposited cash amounting to Rs.1,19,77,876/- in his bank account during the financial year under reference. In such circumstances the AO had sufficient reason to form his belief that the appellant had got income escaped assessment