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

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

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

TDS, Coimbatore [I.T.A. No. 2710/Mum/2015] vide order dated 01-03-2018 has held that: [Page No. 62-67] “5………………..The issue to be decided is as to whether the work carried out by the assessee would fall in the category of technical services as envisaged by the provisions of section 9 of the Act. Technical services mean any consideration paid

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

9 Shri Ram Charan 364 375000 375000 Pandey 31.3.12 10 Shri Mohit Prasar 365 350000 350000 31.3.12 11 Shiv Shakti Enterprises 366 460000 460000 Grant Total 1,00,82,950 1,00,82,950 5.1 Thus the AO made the disallowance of Rs.1,00,82,950/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for want of TDS while passing

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 ANIL KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. THE ITO-5(3), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS. 2. The Learned CIT Appeals-II and the AO has failed to appreciate and or over looked. (i) That the payments made to the transporters are not in respect of a transport contract for carriage of goods. (ii) That the payment made are in respect of hire of transport” 3. Brief facts of the case limited to the issue

RSV GLOBAL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

139; (ii) has taken into account such sum for computing income in such return of income; and (iii) has paid the tax due on the income declared by him in such return of income, and the person furnishes a certificate to this effect from an accountant in such form as may be prescribed] Provided [further] that no penalty shall

M/S. M. LODHA IMPEX,RATLAM vs. THE ITO-1, RATLAM

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 185/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2000-01 M/S.M.Lodha Impex, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, 117-118, Manak Chowk, Ward 1, Ratlam. Ratlam.

9 :- M.LODHA IMPEX,RATLAM. so far as may be, apply thereto. Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply unless the income from which the tax has been deducted or income on which the tax has been collected has been disclosed in the return of income filed by the assessee for the relevant assessment year. " The assesse

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

In the result common ground no

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

139-140 Electronic Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) PAN: AAACB2100P Appellant by Shri Ronak Doshi, CA Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 25.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 25.10.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: The above captioned appeals at the instance of Assessee pertaining to A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11 are directed

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

In the result common ground no

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

139-140 Electronic Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) PAN: AAACB2100P Appellant by Shri Ronak Doshi, CA Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 25.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 25.10.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: The above captioned appeals at the instance of Assessee pertaining to A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11 are directed

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. PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

TDS on security charges. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made in the written submissions. 9. Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions. 10. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The submission of the assessee is that these amounts have been duly declared

M/S. PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

TDS on security charges. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made in the written submissions. 9. Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions. 10. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The submission of the assessee is that these amounts have been duly declared

M/S PATIDAR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 2(1), UJJAIN

In the result, ITA No.1007/Ind/2016 is partly allowed, is allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

TDS on security charges. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made in the written submissions. 9. Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions. 10. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The submission of the assessee is that these amounts have been duly declared

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 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 & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 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 & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 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