D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VANTAGE ADVERTISING PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

239 (Mum ITAT) wherein on an identical claim such as the one made by the Assessee in the present case, the concept of 'derived from' was explained as hereunder: "9.On going through the principle laid down in above judicial pronouncements, it is manifest that the expression "derived from" is constricted in its ambit when considered in juxtaposition to the expression

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the\n

Bench: The Tribunal Raising The\Nfollowing Grounds Of Appeal For Ay 2008-09 & More Or Less Similar\Ngrounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised In The Appeals For Other A.Ys. As\Nwell:\N\N“1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The National Faceless\Nappeal Centre, Delhi [The Ld. Cit(A)] Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Refund\Nof Excess Dividend Distribution Tax (Ddt) Paid By The Appellant\Namounting To Rs.94,81,687.\N\N2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred\Nin Following The Special Bench Decision Of Mumbai Tribunal In The Case Of\Ndcit Vs Tata Oil India Pvt Ltd (Ita No 6997/Mum/2019) Upholding That\Nddt Is A Tax On Profits Of The Domestic Company & Not On The\Nshareholder.\N\N2.

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a\npetition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the\nAct and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of\nthe appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application\ndated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that\n\nthere

PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the\n

Bench: The Tribunal Raising The\Nfollowing Grounds Of Appeal For Ay 2008-09 & More Or Less Similar\Ngrounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised In The Appeals For Other A.Ys. As\Nwell:\Npage | 2\Nita No(S). 1776 To 1783/Kol/2024\N Assessment Year(S) 2008-09 To 2015-16\Nphilips India Limited.\N“1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The National Faceless\Nappeal Centre, Delhi [The Ld. Cit(A)] Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Refund\Nof Excess Dividend Distribution Tax (Ddt) Paid By The Appellant\Namounting To Rs.94,81,687.\N2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred\Nin Following The Special Bench Decision Of Mumbai Tribunal In The Case Of\Ndcit Vs Tata Oil India Pvt Ltd (Ita No 6997/Mum/2019) Upholding That\Nddt Is A Tax On Profits Of The Domestic Company & Not On The\Nshareholder.\N2.

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a\npetition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the\nAct and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of\nthe appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application\ndated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that\nPage

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG)(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

239 ITR 435 (Madras) has dismissed these grounds of appeal of the assessee. 6. At the time of the hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made before the lower authorities that the assessee had paid interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,90,495/- for delayed payment of TDS before

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) (P)LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

239 ITR 435 (Madras) has dismissed these grounds of appeal of the assessee. 6. At the time of the hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made before the lower authorities that the assessee had paid interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,90,495/- for delayed payment of TDS before

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years i

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a petition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the Act and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application dated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years i

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a petition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the Act and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application dated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years i

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a petition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the Act and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application dated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the\n

Bench: The Tribunal Raising The\Nfollowing Grounds Of Appeal For Ay 2008-09 & More Or Less Similar\Ngrounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised In The Appeals For Other A.Ys. As\Nwell:\Nita No(S). 1776 To 1783/Kol/2024\N Assessment Year(S) 2008-09 To 2015-16\Nphilips India Limited.\N“1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The National Faceless\Nappeal Centre, Delhi [The Ld. Cit(A)] Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Refund\Nof Excess Dividend Distribution Tax (Ddt) Paid By The Appellant\Namounting To Rs.94,81,687.\N2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred\Nin Following The Special Bench Decision Of Mumbai Tribunal In The Case Of\Ndcit Vs Tata Oil India Pvt Ltd (Ita No 6997/Mum/2019) Upholding That\Nddt Is A Tax On Profits Of The Domestic Company & Not On The\Nshareholder.\N2.

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a\npetition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the\nAct and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of\nthe appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application\ndated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that\nthere

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years i

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a petition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the Act and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application dated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the\n

Bench: The Tribunal Raising The\Nfollowing Grounds Of Appeal For Ay 2008-09 & More Or Less Similar\Ngrounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised In The Appeals For Other A.Ys. As\Nwell:\Nita No(S). 1776 To 1783/Kol/2024\N Assessment Year(S) 2008-09 To 2015-16\Nphilips India Limited.\N1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The National Faceless\Nappeal Centre, Delhi [The Ld. Cit(A)] Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Refund\Nof Excess Dividend Distribution Tax (Ddt) Paid By The Appellant\Namounting To Rs.94,81,687.\N2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred\Nin Following The Special Bench Decision Of Mumbai Tribunal In The Case Of\Ndcit Vs Tata Oil India Pvt Ltd (Ita No 6997/Mum/2019) Upholding That\Nddt Is A Tax On Profits Of The Domestic Company & Not On The\Nshareholder.\N2.

TDS in Chapter-XVII-B. The assessee had filed a\npetition for refund which was treated as an application u/s 154 of the\nAct and was decided on 12.10.2022 and the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of\nthe appeal on 29.06.2024. The assessee had filed the application\ndated 23.06.2022 for all the assessment years. The Ld. AR stated that\nPage

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS, already deducted, to the account ofthe Central Government. In holding this, I find solace and derive strengthfrom the decisions of various courts including Hon'ble Supreme Court asdiscussed below: 7.4 Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chennai Properties andInvestment Ltd. (1999) 239 ITR 435 (Mad.) has held the same issueagainst the assessee and disallowed the interest

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 is applicable. 4.8. The Learned DR further argued the provisions of Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. For the sake of convenience, it is reproduced hereunder:- (vii) income by way of fees for technical services payable by – Explanation 2 – For the purposes of this clause, “fees for technical services” means any consideration (including any lump

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-13(3), KOLKATA, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

239 ITR 775 (SC), CIT vs. Radha Devi Poddar [1991] 185 ITR 544 (Cal) etc. Porel Dass Water & Effluent Control Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2402/Kol/2016& ITANo.2441/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13,2011-12&2013-14 However, the above justification and contentions of the assessee regarding its claim for deduction under 80IA (4)(i) of the Act were rejected by the Assessing Officer

ITO, WARD - 13(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD., , HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

239 ITR 775 (SC), CIT vs. Radha Devi Poddar [1991] 185 ITR 544 (Cal) etc. Porel Dass Water & Effluent Control Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2402/Kol/2016& ITANo.2441/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13,2011-12&2013-14 However, the above justification and contentions of the assessee regarding its claim for deduction under 80IA (4)(i) of the Act were rejected by the Assessing Officer

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 1(4)/ KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

239 ITR 775 (SC), CIT vs. Radha Devi Poddar [1991] 185 ITR 544 (Cal) etc. Porel Dass Water & Effluent Control Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.2402/Kol/2016& ITANo.2441/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13,2011-12&2013-14 However, the above justification and contentions of the assessee regarding its claim for deduction under 80IA (4)(i) of the Act were rejected by the Assessing Officer

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

239/- and Rs.1,54,82,000/-; respectively. Its further case is that the same also attracts Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS

WELKIN TELECOM INFRA PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rjesh Kumar, Am ]

239 ITR 435. Aggrieved by this action, the assessee is now in appeal before us. 38. We have heard both the parties and perused the judicial precedents available on this subject. The question before us is, whether the interest paid on non-deduction of TDS/late payment of TDS can be claimed as expenditure for determining the taxable income