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

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

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

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

M/S. ARIHANT CHERITABLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE ITO (TDS)-1, INDORE

In the result, we find no force in the ground of the Revenue, hence dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2015-16

139 (Del) the Hon’ble Delhi High Court observed that the expression ‘technical services’ has to be understood in the sense in which it was used in Explanation 2 to section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and, by applying the rule of noscitur a sociis, the word ‘Technical’ would take colour from the adjunct words i.e., “managerial” and “consultancy

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

GURVINDER KAUR BHATIA ,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

139 (Trib.-Indore) 3. M/s Gupta Spinning Mills vs. CIT in ITANo.3398/Del/2010 4. CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282 (SC) 5. CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108(Bom) 6.CIT vs. R.K. Construction Co. 313 ITR 65 (Gujarat) 7. CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers (2003) 259 ITR 502(Gujarat) 8.CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (20100 189 Taxman

HARLEEN KAUR BHATIA,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2015-16

139 (Trib.-Indore) 3. M/s Gupta Spinning Mills vs. CIT in ITANo.3398/Del/2010 4. CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282 (SC) 5. CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108(Bom) 6.CIT vs. R.K. Construction Co. 313 ITR 65 (Gujarat) 7. CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers (2003) 259 ITR 502(Gujarat) 8.CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (20100 189 Taxman

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

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PVT.LTD.,INDORE vs. THE JCIT, R-5 (PRESENT AO: DCIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

TDS and DDT. As these are statutory liabilities of the assessee the same should have been discharged within the stipulated time. This interest has been paid as the assessee is in default. The assessee is not entitled to deduction of tax deducted at source per se, as such the interest paid for the default in payment of tax deducted/deductible

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ADDL. CIT- RANGE-5, INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

TDS and DDT. As these are statutory liabilities of the assessee the same should have been discharged within the stipulated time. This interest has been paid as the assessee is in default. The assessee is not entitled to deduction of tax deducted at source per se, as such the interest paid for the default in payment of tax deducted/deductible