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

Appeals are allowed

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

2 to section 9(1)(vii) and therefore not liable for TDS u/s 194J. Against decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the department filed appeal to Hon’ble Supreme Court whereupon the Hon’ble Supreme Court remanded matter to department for ascertaining with technical assistance as to whether there was involvement of human intervention or not? The issue again

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

Appeals are allowed

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

2 to section 9(1)(vii) and therefore not liable for TDS u/s 194J. Against decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the department filed appeal to Hon’ble Supreme Court whereupon the Hon’ble Supreme Court remanded matter to department for ascertaining with technical assistance as to whether there was involvement of human intervention or not? The issue again

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 u/s 194J of the Act and accordingly treating the Appellant as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201 r.w.s. section 194J of the Act. Page 5 of 65 ITA No. 415/Ind/2014 & 265/Ind/2018 – AY 2010-11 M/s Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Formerly M/s Idea Cellular Ltd.) 2

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 u/s 194J of the Act and accordingly treating the Appellant as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201 r.w.s. section 194J of the Act. Page 5 of 65 ITA No. 415/Ind/2014 & 265/Ind/2018 – AY 2010-11 M/s Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Formerly M/s Idea Cellular Ltd.) 2

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

201(1)/201(1A) of the Page 1 of 8 Idea Cellular Ltd.. Page 2 of 8 Income tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') passed by the Income Tax Officer (TDS) II, Indore ('AO') on the following grounds: GROUND I: NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE ("TDS") UNDER SECTION

M/S DHAR AUTHOMOTIVE PVT. LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

In the result, the second issue for lower/non-deduction of TCS

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

201(1A) by applying incorrect rate of deduction of TDS & correct head of deduction. The correct Head of deduction is 194C in which rate of deduction was 2% while the Ld. Officer considered incorrect head u/s 194J in which rate of deduction taken @10% & sustained the order of DCIT(TDS) Indore which is bad in law unjustified and unwarranted should

M/S DHAR AUTHOMOTIVE PVT. LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

In the result, the second issue for lower/non-deduction of TCS

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

201(1A) by applying incorrect rate of deduction of TDS & correct head of deduction. The correct Head of deduction is 194C in which rate of deduction was 2% while the Ld. Officer considered incorrect head u/s 194J in which rate of deduction taken @10% & sustained the order of DCIT(TDS) Indore which is bad in law unjustified and unwarranted should

M/S DHAR AUTHOMOTIVE PVT. LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

In the result, the second issue for lower/non-deduction of TCS

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

201(1A) by applying incorrect rate of deduction of TDS & correct head of deduction. The correct Head of deduction is 194C in which rate of deduction was 2% while the Ld. Officer considered incorrect head u/s 194J in which rate of deduction taken @10% & sustained the order of DCIT(TDS) Indore which is bad in law unjustified and unwarranted should

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section

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

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that assessee was liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 24,417/-.” ITA Nos.378to387/Ind/2022 M/s. Star Delta Transformers Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Years –2013-14 to 2015-16(Q.1 to Q. 4) - 4 – 4. A TDS survey under Section