HERIGAGE HEALTH TPA(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(TDS), CIRCLE -57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. The assessee has also referred to the provisions of section 204 of the IT Act which defines the words “person responsible for paying” used in Section 194J

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. The assessee has also referred to the provisions of section 204 of the IT Act which defines the words “person responsible for paying” used in Section 194J

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-57(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. The assessee has also referred to the provisions of section 204 of the IT Act which defines the words “person responsible for paying” used in Section 194J

A.C.I.T(TDS) CIR - 57,KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. The assessee has also referred to the provisions of section 204 of the IT Act which defines the words “person responsible for paying” used in Section 194J

M/S CHUNDER KHATORE & ASSOCIATES,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 54(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2007-08

TDS u/s. 194J of Income tax Act, 1961 has not been deducted. It is humbly submitted in this regard that the consultancy charges are in the nature of hiring charges paid for hiring non qualified personnel. Section

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

TDS under section 194J of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961.\n4. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SDV INTERNATION LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

TDS is governed by section 194J and section 9(1)(vi) as it existed before Finance Act 2012.It is difficult

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SDV INTERNATION LOGISTICS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

TDS is governed by section 194J and section 9(1)(vi) as it existed before Finance Act 2012.It is difficult

SDV INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

TDS is governed by section 194J and section 9(1)(vi) as it existed before Finance Act 2012.It is difficult

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE - 6, SILIGURI

TDS under section 194J of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961.\n4. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D,C,I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS under section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

TDS under section 194J- Held, yes [Para 6] in favour of assessee”. c) DCIT vs Delhi Transco Ltd reported in (2014) 52 taxmann.com

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS Sections: The learned CIT(A) incorrectly upheld the application of Section 194C on advertisement payments and Section 194J on incentive/commission

TAPAS KUMAR SARKAR,BARASAT, NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS Sections: The learned CIT(A) incorrectly upheld the application of Section 194C on advertisement payments and Section 194J on incentive/commission

ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DURGAPUR vs. ITO(TDS), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

194J of the Act on the total payment of Rs. 2.60 crore in the fourth quarter of F.Y. 2009-10.” The ld AO observed that non-deduction of tax at source on the same would make the assessee as an ‘assessee in default’ in terms of section 201(1) of the Act and would be invited with consequential interest

DCIT(E),CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

194J of the Act on the total payment of Rs. 2.60 crore in the fourth quarter of F.Y. 2009-10.” The ld AO observed that non-deduction of tax at source on the same would make the assessee as an ‘assessee in default’ in terms of section 201(1) of the Act and would be invited with consequential interest

ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DURGAPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

194J of the Act on the total payment of Rs. 2.60 crore in the fourth quarter of F.Y. 2009-10.” The ld AO observed that non-deduction of tax at source on the same would make the assessee as an ‘assessee in default’ in terms of section 201(1) of the Act and would be invited with consequential interest

ACIT, CIR-1, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. ASANSOL DURGAPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DURGAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1494/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Ito(Tds), Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2185, 1452& 1453/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Asansol Durgapur Development Authority -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Durgapur [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1439 & 1440/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Durgapur -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2155/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit(E), Circle-2, Kolkata -Vs- Asansol Durgapur Development Authority [Pan: Aaala 0733 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit Dr

194J of the Act on the total payment of Rs. 2.60 crore in the fourth quarter of F.Y. 2009-10.” The ld AO observed that non-deduction of tax at source on the same would make the assessee as an ‘assessee in default’ in terms of section 201(1) of the Act and would be invited with consequential interest