THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

TDS under Section 195 of the Act? (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee cannot be held as 'assessee in default under Section 201(1) of the Act' even when the assessing authority after considering the particulars furnished by assessee, passed order under Section

NICE LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

3) of the Income-tax Act and an assessment order was passed on 15.4.2014. In the assessment order it was held that the amount received by the appellant from the sale of software was in the nature of royalty in terms of Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,M G UMA

195 I.T.A No. 366/2017 5 Section 153(2A) of the IT Act, 1961 is not applicable in respect of orders under Sections 201 and 201(1A) of the Act because, as on the date of the Assessing Officer's order namely 30.03.2011, as per Section 201(3), the Assessing Officer could pass the orders for the Financial Year commencing

M/S.KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

In the result, the appeals are allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

3. In respect of financial year ending on 31.03.2007, a similar provision towards contingent interest payable on belated payments were created but at the end of the year, the said amount though treated as expenditure in the profit and loss account was not excluded to arrive at the taxable income in the return of income filed for the year

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

3 proceedings initiated by revenue under said provision is in accordance with parameters of said section? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee cannot be held as 'assessee in default' under Section 201(1A) of I.T.Act even when the proceedings initiated by revenue under said provision

PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD.,

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

TDS was deduction under Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly been made. It is also argued that Section 40 of the Act begins with a non obstante clause and has an overriding effect on Sections 3

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

TDS was deduction under Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly been made. It is also argued that Section 40 of the Act begins with a non obstante clause and has an overriding effect on Sections 3

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

TDS was deduction under Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly been made. It is also argued that Section 40 of the Act begins with a non obstante clause and has an overriding effect on Sections 3

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SOFTWARE AND SILICON SYSTEMS (I) PVT LTD

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

3 TDS in respect of payments made for purchase of software as the same cannot be treated as income liable to tax in India as Royalty or Scientific Work under section 9 of the Act read with Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements and treaties? b) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that since the assessee had purchased only a right

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,M G UMA

TDS), Circle 18(2), Bangalore 2 ' IT Act' for short I.T.A No.359/2017 4 The CIT(A)3 upheld Assessing Officer's order. On further appeal, the ITAT4, Kolkata, vide order dated July 26, 2006 remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to pass fresh orders. The Assessing Officer has passed his order on March 30, 2011 and the same

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD

Appeal is allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,M G UMA

TDS), Circle 18(2), Bangalore 2 ' IT Act' for short I.T.A No.360/2017 4 The CIT(A)3 upheld Assessing Officer's order. On further appeal, the ITAT4, Kolkata, vide order dated August 8, 2007 remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to pass fresh orders. The Assessing Officer has passed his order on March 30, 2011 and the same

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ING VYSYA LIFE INSURANCE CO (P) LTD

Appeal is allowed, the questions

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

TDS in respect of payments made for purchase of software as the same cannot be treated as income liable to tax in the India as Royalty or Scientific Work under section 9 of the Act read with Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements and treaties. 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that since the assessee had purchased only a right

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

3. Whether tribunal was correct in confirming the common order passed by first respondent deeming that appellant is to be treated as an assessee in default under Section 201(1) of the IT Act by holding that payments made by the assessee were in the nature of "royalty payments" 4 as defined under Explanation 2 to Section

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. M/S. PUMA SPORTS INDIA P., LTD.,

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

3% of FOB price. The facts of the case make it very clear that the Dispute Resumption Panel proceeded in the matter on the basis of the situs in India because right to receive the commission accrued in India when the assessee receives the imported goods. In the present case, the Associated Enterprises have rendered services outside India

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. IBM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

3. In his order dated September 14, 2012 the Assessing Officer has recorded that the Assessee had made payments to IBM Business Services, Philippines for payroll services without deducting tax at source. The AO2 concluded that in respect of payments made towards FTS3 TDS ought to have been deducted under Section 195

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR P LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

195, 194C, 194J, 194H and 194I of the Act. It is also submitted that no interference with the order of the tribunal is called for in exercise of powers under Section 260A of the Act. 8. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Before proceeding further, it is apposite

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX vs. M/S KAWASAKI MICRO ELECTRONICS INC

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

3 section 32 of the Act on an capitalized expenditure on imported software which was purchased by paying Rs.4.05 Crores without deducting TDS as required under section 195

THE DIRECTOR (COMMISSIONER) OF INCOME TAX vs. CGI INFORMATION SYSTEMS & MANAGEMENT

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Court This Day, K Sreedhar Rao, J., Made The Following:- J U D G M E N T The Following Substantial Question Of Law Is Framed For Consideration: “Whether The Tribunal Was Correct In Holding That An Appeal Was Maintainable Under Section 248 Of The Act, Even Though There Was No Adjudication By The Authorities Under The Act In Accordance With Section 195(3), (4) & (5) Read With Section 200 Of The Act?” 2. In View Of The Decision Of This Court In The Case Of Jindal Thermal Power Company Limited (Earlier Known As Jindal Tractebel Power Co. Ltd.,) Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) Reported In (2010)

195(3), (4) and (5) read with Section 200 of the Act?” 2. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Power Company Limited (earlier known as Jindal Tractebel Power Co. Ltd.,) Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS