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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

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

92-A, Industrial Area Govindpura, Bhopal Bhopal-462016 PAN No.AACCS0399D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Anil Khabya, C.A. Appellant by : Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 10.04.2023 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals are filed by the same assessee against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

TDS return/statement before 1-6-2015 i.e. insertion of caluse (c) to section 200A have also been examined by various High Courts and have upheld the chargeability of fee u/s 234E and the assessee's appeal have been dismissed. In particular, the decisions of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, Madras High Court & Rajasthan High Court may kindly be referred

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

TDS return/statement before 1-6-2015 i.e. insertion of caluse (c) to section 200A have also been examined by various High Courts and have upheld the chargeability of fee u/s 234E and the assessee's appeal have been dismissed. In particular, the decisions of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, Madras High Court & Rajasthan High Court may kindly be referred

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 with Explanation2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC charges to various operators at Rs. 10,18,92

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 with Explanation2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC charges to various operators at Rs. 10,18,92

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 with Explanation2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC charges to various operators at Rs. 10,18,92

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) of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 194J read with Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC charges to various operators at Rs. 10,18,92

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) of this is not fees for technical services as envisaged in Section 194J read with Section 9(1)(vii) read with Explanation2 of the Act. In case before us, the assessee has paid roaming charges i.e. IUC charges to various operators at Rs. 10,18,92

M/S TESLA TRANSFORMERS ,BHOPAL vs. ITO(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, BHOPAL

In the result, Ground Numbers 1 to 4 of assessee’s appeal are dismissed

TDS default u/s 195 amounting to Rs.27,66,720/- u/s 201(1) of the Act. 3. That the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that in the transaction of import of raw- material valuing Rs.4,02,92,017/- from foreign companies , income accrued under the provisions of section

THE ACIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

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

92 TTJ 74(Mum). The DRP observed that Australian Company provided complete design, drawing and the assessee has not purchased designs & drawings but only agreed to right to use it under license. Therefore, the assessee was liable to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act. Since, the assessee has not deducted TDS, provisions of section

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS V A TECH HYDRO INDAI PVT. LTD.),MANDIDEEP vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

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

92 TTJ 74(Mum). The DRP observed that Australian Company provided complete design, drawing and the assessee has not purchased designs & drawings but only agreed to right to use it under license. Therefore, the assessee was liable to deduct TDS u/s. 195 of the Act. Since, the assessee has not deducted TDS, provisions of section