VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL,BARWAHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS II INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivijay Kumar Goyal Ito, 48, Narmada Barwala Nfac Vs. Mp Delhi (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Asrpg8655L Assessee By Shri Ram Gilda, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08 .05.2024

section 194IA. Thus, what is relevant for threshold limit is the consideration actually paid or stamp duty valuation of immovable property. When the assessee has paid only Rs.40,00,000/- then the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS u/s 194

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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS was required to be deducted under Section 194H read with Section 194 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short

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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS was required to be deducted under Section 194H read with Section 194 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short

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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS was required to be deducted under Section 194H read with Section 194 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short

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)

TDS was required to be deducted under Section 194H read with Section 194 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short

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)

TDS was required to be deducted under Section 194H read with Section 194 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 194-C and 194-J as required under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the deductor assessee did not deducted TDS

AMEY JAIN,INDORE vs. OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2019-20 Amey Jain, Ito 1(1), 127, Anurag Nagar Bh Indore Press Complex, बनाम/ Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aqbpj1217D Assessee By Shri Harsh Choukse & Shri Kunal Agrawal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2026

section 200A for computation of fee. The assessee is not disputing that at the time of filing of revised Form 26QB on 16-12-2015, s. 234E of the Act (which came into effect from 1- 6-2015) was in force and in effect. The issue for consideration is when the assessee had initially deposited TDS u/s 194

M/S. IDEA CELLUAR LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ITO (TDS)-II, INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Vodafone Idea Ltd. Ito (Tds)-Ii (Formerly Known As M/S. Indore Idea Cellular Ltd.) Vs. 139-140 Electronics Complex Pardeshipura, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacb 2100P Assessee By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Shri Gagan Tiwari, Adv Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.11.2023

section 201(1A) of the Act be deleted or be appropriately reduced.” 2. The Sr. counsel of the assessee has submitted that the issue involved in this appeal of the assessee is identical to the issue for A.Y.2007-08 to 2019-10 & 2014-15 to 2017-18 which were considered and decided by this tribunal vide order dated