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

Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly

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

Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly

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

Section 195 of the Act on the aforesaid payment, therefore, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has rightly

ALLEGIS SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

The appeal is allowed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for non deduction of tax at source under Section 195

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

195 of the Act. 7. It is also argued that since payment to non resident was in the nature of royalty in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and no TDS 16 was deducted on the payment, therefore, disallowance

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

disallowance made under Section 40(a)(1) of the Act for the sum of 5 Rs.7,29,13,934/- by holding that the income of the non-residents by way of commission cannot be considered as accrued or arisen or deemed to accrue or arise in India as the services of such agents were rendered or utilized outside India

M/S COURSE5 INTELLIGENCE PVT. LTD., vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeals stand disposed of, as indicated above

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

disallowance on account of non deduction of tax under 5 Section 195 in violation of a specific provisions of the Act and should

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

disallowances made under Section 40a(i) and (ia) of the Act. The assessee thereupon furnished the information vide communication dated 12.08.2013. 4. The Assessing Officer initiated the proceeding under Section 201 and 201(1A) of the Act and treated the assessee as assessee in default in respect of the 6 amount made in provision, which was reversed / un- utilized

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TECNO TREE CONVERGENCE LTD.,

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,G BASAVARAJA

disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect of commission payment by holding that the provisions of section 195

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TECHNOTREE CONVERGENCE LTD

Appeal stands disposed of, as no

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect of commission payment by holding that the provisions of section 195

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CERNER HEALTH

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

195 of the Act on the amount of Rs.4,09,77,678/- being reimbursement of expenses paid to M/s. Cerner Corporation, USA when all the ingredients of said section are satisfied attracting disallowance

LITTLE EYE SOFTWARE LABS PRIVATE LIMITED

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: VINEET KOTHARI

195 of the Act on the amount of Rs.4,09,77,678/- being reimbursement of expenses paid to M/s. Cerner Corporation, USA when all the ingredients of said section are satisfied attracting disallowance

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed the expenditure under section 40(a)(i) of IT Act as the assessee had failed to comply with the provisions of section 195

MPHASIS LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice B. Veerappa Writ Petition No.13313 Of 2017 (T-It)

disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is to be made of the expenses incurred and claimed by the assessee but before the payment of which, the assessee has failed to deduct tax at source. The genuineness of the expenditure is not in dispute. The dispute is whether Tax Deducted at Source was to be made before making

M/S ANSYS SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order dated 29

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

disallowance made under the provisions of Section 40[a][i] of the Act for the Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07, by holding that the payments made by the appellant company to non-residents are in the nature of Royalty and the appellant is required to deduct TDS as per the provisions of Section 195

M/S. CHARIOT INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 195 of the Act. 5 3. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who, by an order dated 30.08.2012 inter alia, held that the assessee has failed to furnish either any evidence or proof with regard to the fact that the payments were made to the foreign parties for the services rendered outside

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act was made on account of non-deduction of tax at source for the sums payable by the appellant to Google Ireland under the Distribution 7 Agreement. The assessing officer vide common order dated 22.2.2013 for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2012-13 passed an order under Section

M/S GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the IT Act was made on account of non-deduction of tax at source for the sums payable by the appellant to Google Ireland under the Distribution 7 Agreement. The assessing officer vide common order dated 22.2.2013 for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2012-13 passed an order under Section