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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS) of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 194J read with Section 9(1)(vii) read

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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS) of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 194J read with Section 9(1)(vii) read

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

Appeals are allowed

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

TDS) of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 194J read with Section 9(1)(vii) read

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

TDS deduction u/s 194C in the order for FY\n2010-11 and FY 2011-12.\n\n2. That The Ld Addl/JCIT (A) erred in sustaining the order u/s\n1,07,74,877 u/s 201(1) and Rs 78,65,660 u/s 201(1A) of the\nIncome Tax Act by applying section 194J

CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER, NAGAR PALIKA,PITHAMPUR vs. ITO, DHAR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2016-17 Chief Municipal Officer, Acit (Tds) Nagar Palika, Opposite Indore बनाम/ Bajaj Tempo, Sector No.1 Vs. Pithampur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Tan: Bplc01981A Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2026

section 201(1) for short deduction of TDS u/s 194J for an amount of Rs. 4,36,013. 4. On the facts

THE ITO (TDS) -1 , BHOPAL vs. MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA AJEEVIKA FORUM, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.O.(Tds)-1, Madhya Pradesh Rajya Bhopal Ajeevika Forum, 3Rd Floor, Beej Bhawan, बनाम/ Arera Hills, Vs. Bhopal

TDS-1, Bhopal [“Ld. AO”] u/s 201(1)/(1A) of Income- tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2015-16, the revenue has filed this appeal. 2. The controversy involved in present appeal is the applicability of section 194C or 194J

URBAN ADMINISTRATION AMD DEVELOPMENT,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), BHOPAL

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as & by way of

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshidirectorate Of Urban Deputy बनाम/ Administrations & Development, Commissioner Of Vs. Nagar Palika Bhawan, 6 No.Bus Income Tax-Tds, Stop, R.S.Market, Bhopal S.O. Huzur, Bhopal(M.P.) (Tan: Bpldo1618B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv. & Ms. Apoorva Garg, Ca Revenue By Shri Anup Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2026 आदेश / O R D E R

TDS of Rs.2,98,992 alongwith interest of Rs.2,60,123 under section 194J on payment made to CEPT University

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION DIVISION NO.2 ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT (TDS) , BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Executive Engineer, Dy. Cit (Tds), Construction, Bhopal Division No.2, बनाम/ E-5, Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Bplo 00510 G Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.02.2024

section 194J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Page 1 of 4 Executive Engineer Construction, Division No. 2, Bhopal vs. Dy. CIT (TDS

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

Appeal is allowed

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

Section 194H of the Act is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee-cellular mobile service providers, challenging the judgments of the High Courts of Delhi and Calcutta are allowed and these judgments are set aside. The appeals filed by the Revenue challenging the judgments of High Courts of Rajasthan

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

SAMARTHAN CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT,BHOPAL vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2018-19 Samarthan Centre For Dcit (Exemption) Development Support, Bhopal 36, Green Venue, बनाम/ Kolar Road Huzur, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaats3998P Assessee By Shri Pradeep Ambastha & Ashish Goyal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.01.2025

194J / 194C out of a part of those receipts, the AO cannot conclude that the receipts were towards professional or technical services. Ld. AR quoted the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Aroh Foundation Vs. CIT(Exemption) WP(c) 4365/2021 dated 05.02.2024 wherein it was held that mere deduction of TDS by the givers cannot make the receipts

SHRI LAV NARANG,UJJAIN vs. PCIT,, UJJAIN

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

194J( As per 26AS) are more than the receipts shown in ITR5/5/6”. Notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were served upon the assessee. It was admitted before Ld. AO that books of account are not maintained, statutory requirement of getting the books of account audited u/s 44AB of the Act not complied. As per the 26AS