VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE EAST LTD.), KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE EAST LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, TDS, CIR-59 (TDS) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, TDS, CIR-59 (TDS) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE EAST LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.), KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 194H on the payment made to the distributors of post paid connections but the same is not being done in the case of prepaid distributors. 3. The relationship between the assessee and distributors of prepaid connections is not on principal to principal basis essentially but there exists an agency agreement between them as evident from the several clauses

EXIMCORP INDIA (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 195 of the Act. The ld. A/R further argued that following the case of GE India Technology Cen. (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2010] 193 Taxman 234 (SC) there can be obligation to deduct tax at source only when the remittance is a sum chargeable to tax under the Act. If the income has not accrued in India

EXIMCORP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-5(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 195 of the Act. The ld. A/R further argued that following the case of GE India Technology Cen. (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2010] 193 Taxman 234 (SC) there can be obligation to deduct tax at source only when the remittance is a sum chargeable to tax under the Act. If the income has not accrued in India

LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

193 IR 321, deduction under these sections has to be allowed to the appellant in the assessment year 2009-10 also. (v) Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, and the legal position, I am of the considered view that the appellant is entitled for the continued claim of deduction under section

D.C.I.T. CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S FIVES STEIN INDIA PROJECTS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS thereon was duly remitted to the account of Central Government on 8.9.2009 which is before the due date of filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act and accordingly prayed for allowing the same as deduction. The Learned CIT(A) after calling for a remand report in this regard sought to delete the addition in view

M/S. EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NADIA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini] I.T.A. No. 278/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13

TDS before making the payment under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. My attention was invited to the fact that the appellant has offered discounts to the customers as per the contract of sale entered into between the appellant and the customers taken place on a principal to principal basis. Further, my attention is also drawn to the decision

DCIT, CIR-12(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SELVEL MEDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ( Ground No

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2205/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T, Cirle-12(2), Vs. M/S Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata 10/1B, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata – 700 027. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 7951 G (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) Assessee By :Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Revenue/Department By :Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.237/Xii/Cir-12/14-15 Dated 17.09.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 20.03.2014. 2. Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,42,76,824/- Made By The A.O. On Depreciation On Hoarding Structures.” 2. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,66,53,847/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Deduction U/S. 80-Ia.”

193 ITR 321 (SC). Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A), hence we confirm the order passed by CIT(A). 3.6 In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ( Ground No.1), is dismissed. 4. Ground No. 2 raised by Revenue relates to disallowance of Rs. 1,66,53,847/- made