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

Appeals are allowed

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

3. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of providing telecom services through pre-paid and post-paid connections. In order to provide such services, the assessee allowed certain amounts to distributors of sim cards and prepaid recharge vouchers. Further, the assessee also took services from Other Telecom Operators [“OTOs”] and paid ‘roaming charges’ to those OTOs

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

Appeals are allowed

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

3. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of providing telecom services through pre-paid and post-paid connections. In order to provide such services, the assessee allowed certain amounts to distributors of sim cards and prepaid recharge vouchers. Further, the assessee also took services from Other Telecom Operators [“OTOs”] and paid ‘roaming charges’ to those OTOs

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

Appeals are allowed

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

3. The assessee-company is engaged in the business of providing telecom services through pre-paid and post-paid connections. In order to provide such services, the assessee allowed certain amounts to distributors of sim cards and prepaid recharge vouchers. Further, the assessee also took services from Other Telecom Operators [“OTOs”] and paid ‘roaming charges’ to those OTOs

M/S. S.R. FERRO ALLOYS,JHABUA vs. THE PCIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanis.R. Ferro Alloys Pr. Cit, Central 9, Siddheswar Colony Bhopal Vs. Jhabua (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Abhfs7377Q Appellant By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.11.2023

194 Taxman 57 and CIT v. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. [2012] 28 taxmann.com 273/ [2013] 212 Taxman 184 (Delhi), it held that once inquiry was made, a mere non discussion or non- mention thereof in assessment order cannot lead to assumption that Assessing Officer did not apply his mind or that he has not made inquiry on the subject

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)

3. Without prejudice, retrospective amendment under the Act cannot fasten a TDS liability on the appellant. 4. The Appellant prays that the order passed u/s 201 r.w.s. 194J treating Appellant as an assessee in default u/s 194J on roaming charges paid by set-aside as being bad in law.” 7. Ld. AR for assessee carried us to above grounds

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)

3. Without prejudice, retrospective amendment under the Act cannot fasten a TDS liability on the appellant. 4. The Appellant prays that the order passed u/s 201 r.w.s. 194J treating Appellant as an assessee in default u/s 194J on roaming charges paid by set-aside as being bad in law.” 7. Ld. AR for assessee carried us to above grounds

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

3 21,840 447 2,184 1,737 486 2,223 4 4 29,120 596 2,912 2,316 608 2,924 Total 87,360 6,948 2,073 9,021 1.3] The appellant entered into a contract with M/s Hoswin Incinerator Private Limited for collection and disposal of waste and M/s Hoswin Incinerator Private Limited did not provide

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

V: LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the AO in holding the Appellant as 'assessee in default' under section 201 of the Act and thereby levying the interest under section

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

3. The averments made by assessee in above application, which are self- explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld. DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary

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

SHRI SATISH JAIN,INDORE vs. THE CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

3. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Income tax passed under section 263 of the Act, the assessee preferred the present appeal before us. 4. The Ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that there was a detailed application of mind by the AO since detailed questionnaire with respect to commission payments were issued even further enquiries were made

BAL BHAVAN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed as mentioned above

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Bal Bhavan School, Dcit (Exemption), 1, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaaab3678G Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.06.2024

194- I. Copies of Ledger A/c of Lease-Rent and TDS certificates (Form No. 16A) issued by assessee are filed at Page 53-77 of Paper-Book. (v) That both of the payees have filed their respective returns, declared rental incomes, paid due taxes and claimed credit of TDS deducted by assessee out of rent payments, copies of ITR documents

M/S SATNAM TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. THE CIT- II, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

194 Taxman 57(Del). Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Design & Automation Engineers (Bombay) P. Ltd. [2008] 323 ITR 632. 4. Per contra Ld. DR opposed the submissions and placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT(supra

THE DCIT, 5(1), INDORE vs. M/S. SATNAM TRANSPORT COMPANY, INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

194 Taxman 57(Del). Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Design & Automation Engineers (Bombay) P. Ltd. [2008] 323 ITR 632. 4. Per contra Ld. DR opposed the submissions and placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT(supra

SATNAM TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-5(1), INDORE

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2008-09

194 Taxman 57(Del). Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Design & Automation Engineers (Bombay) P. Ltd. [2008] 323 ITR 632. 4. Per contra Ld. DR opposed the submissions and placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT(supra

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

TDS-II (AO) has erred both on facts and in law in applying the provisions of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the discount given to distributors on sale of pre-paid products, being, "right to use Airtime for a specified value". The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both on facts

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

TDS-II (AO) has erred both on facts and in law in applying the provisions of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the discount given to distributors on sale of pre-paid products, being, "right to use Airtime for a specified value". The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both on facts

M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLWER,VIDISHA vs. THE ACIT- II, VIDISHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees in

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2016-17 M/S. Alankar Jewellers Acit-Ii Nikasha Road, Vidisha Bhopal बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D It(Ss)A No.205/Ind/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 Acit-Ii M/S. Alankar Jewellers Bhopal Nikasha Road, Vidisha बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Respondent By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

v) The assessee could not match the list of items mentioned in the wealth Tax Return with the stock found during the course of search. (vi) The will is not registered and-various factors raise suspicion that t:1 ~ will is fabricated and after thought. Considering the various objections raised by the AO in point (i), (ii) andIiv