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

7. We may at the outset record that, learned counsel appearing for both sides have made submissions which shall be dealt with appropriately at the later stage. But, in order to appreciate the controversies including that of the background, certain aspects deserve to be taken note of which are as under: 8. As per Section200(3) of the Act read

SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

7. We may at the outset record that, learned counsel appearing for both sides have made submissions which shall be dealt with appropriately at the later stage. But, in order to appreciate the controversies including that of the background, certain aspects deserve to be taken note of which are as under: 8. As per Section200(3) of the Act read

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 on payments made in respect of purchase of intellectual property rights by following its earlier order which has not reached finality and even when the ingredients of 7 section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are satisfied in case of assessee? 4. Facts leading to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that assessee is engaged in business

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 on payments made in respect of purchase of intellectual property rights by following its earlier order which has not reached finality and even when the ingredients of 7 section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are satisfied in case of assessee? 4. Facts leading to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that assessee is engaged in business

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 on payments made in respect of purchase of intellectual property rights by following its earlier order which has not reached finality and even when the ingredients of 7 section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are satisfied in case of assessee? 4. Facts leading to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that assessee is engaged in business

GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

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

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

TDS credit to the extent of Rs.8,79,156/-. An order of rectification was passed on 13.07.2010 by which refund of a sum of Rs.10,55,000/- was granted. Thereafter, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was initiated on 11.10.2012 and a notice under Section 153A of the Act was issued

TTK HEALTHCARE TPA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

7. It is contended that hospitals do not carry on any profession but are engaged in business activity. Therefore, they would be outside the definition of Explanation (a) to Section 194J(3) of the Act. It is further submitted that only an individual can carry on a medical profession and a hospital cannot carry on profession. In this connection

M/S. LAKSHMINIRMAN BANGALORE PVT.LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

DR V. NARAYANASWAMY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

SRI CHANDRAKAR K KAMATH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

M/S. K K BROTHERS vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

SRI. FATHERAJ SINGHVI vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when

ECOLE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS lies in the fact that it prepones the collection of tax to ensure regular source of revenue and wider base for tax. 5. It is contended that under the Act there is an obligation on the Department to process the income tax returns filed by the assessee within specified period and such processing can be done only when