M/S PROCESS PUMPS vs. UNION OF INDIA

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

100. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI-110 001 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

100. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI-110 001 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

M/S CATHODIC CONTROL CO. LTD., vs. UNION OF INDIA

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

100. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI-110 001 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

SRI.FATHERAJ SINGHVI, vs. UNION OF INDIA

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

100. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI-110 001 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 4TH FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

TDS was enquired by DCIT Circle-I, Ananthpur and ITO, Ward-I, Proddatur, Andhra Pradesh. The Assessing Officer without taking this evidence on record, furnishing copies of statements to assessee or permitting cross-examination,, relied on it and disallowed Rs.131,00,28,895/- and Rs.37,69,65,007/- in all Rs.168,69,93,902/-. Further, the assessing officer has proceeded

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S LUWA INDIA PVT LTD

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,N.KUMAR

Section 201 (1A), assessee was liable to pay simple interest at one per cent for every month or part of month, in case of failure to deduct tax on payment of deducted tax, increase is made correspondingly from one per cent to one and half per cent for every month or part of month for discouraging delay in deposit

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI SCORPIO ENGINEERING

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 201 (1A), assessee was liable to p[ay simple interest at one per cent for every month or part of month, in case of 10 failure to deduct tax on payment of deducted tax, increase is made correspondingly from one per cent to one and half per cent for every month or part of month for discouraging delay

M/S PRODIGY TECHNOVATIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

M/S CATHODIC CONTROL CO LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

SREE C B EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL TRUST vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

CENTRAL POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

M/S MAHRISHI MELTCHEMS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

SRI. FATHERAJ SINGHVI vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

ADITHYA BIZORP SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

ECOLE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

M/S PROCESS PUMPS (I) PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income

M/S HOTEL FISHLAND vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

100 order to examine as to whether the fee charged under Section 234E is in fact fee or penalty or compensatory tax, it could be seen from Section 199 of the Act that any deduction made in accordance with Section 200 to Section 206 would be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income