MANIPAL HEALTH SYSTEMS

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

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR

TDS to the assessing authority for re-verifying even when the assessing authority is rightly disallowed Rs.17,38,222 under section 40(a)(ia) by considering the available materials on record as well as provisions of the Act"?" 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants- revenue has fairly submitted before this court that so far as substantial question Nos.3

THE COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND ANR vs. THE BIJAPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL

Bench: R.DEVDAS,VINEET KOTHARI

TDS, was liable to be made as per the provisions of Section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act. 4. Both the learned counsel at Bar fairly submitted that the said issue is no longer res-integra in view of the CBTD Circular No.19/2015 holding that such Co-operative Banks are not required to deduct tax at source an interest paid

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, vs. M/S CORPORATION BANK

In the result, the third substantial question of law is also answered

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

TDS under section 194H of the Income Tax Act? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is a Nationalized Bank. The assessee had filed the return of income on 28.09.2011 by which income of Rs.1412,98,.50,750/- was declared. Thereafter, a revised return was filed on 23.12.2011 by which income of Rs.1366

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S. CORPORATION BANK

Appeal stands dismissed accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

TDS as required under Section 194H of the Act? 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowances made under Section 36

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

36,680/-. The assessing authority passed an order under Section 143(3) read with Section 144(C)(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) by making transfer pricing adjustment for Rs.4,16,65,106/- on the basis of the order passed under Section 92CA of the Act dated 24.10.2016. The assessing authority also made other

M/S CANBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

36,98,594 Tax liability net of TDS Rs.11,37,08,712 Interest u/s.234C for the Q.E 15-06-2013 Rs. 5,05,359 Interest u/s.234C for the Q.E 15-09-2013 Rs. 15,16,107 Total Interest charged u/s 234C as per intimation u/s. 143(1) Rs. 20,21,466 6. In view of the above, I find that

THE RADDI SAHAKAR BANK NIYAMIT vs. ADDITIONAL/ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OFM INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice M.I.Arun

TDS liability has been remanded back to the fourth respondent – Assessing Officer. Regarding the grievance of the petitioner about disallowance of - 4 - W.P. No.103096 of 2022 Rs.3,76,000/- being excess claim of deduction under Section 36

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

36(1)(iii) of the Act. The said provision corresponds to s 10(2)(ii) of the old Act. In Madhav Prasad Jatia vs. CIT (1979) 10 CTR (SC) 375: (1979) 118 ITR 200 (SC): TC 15R.823, the apex Court observed that the conditions required to be fulfilled to be entitled to deduction were that the interest must have been

M/S PRAKASH BUS CORPORATION PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

SRI CHANDRAKAR K KAMATH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

M/S TEE ENN ENTERPRISES vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

M/S HOTEL FISHLAND vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

SRI. FATHERAJ SINGHVI vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE

ECOLE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

36 OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. 2. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE