BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

30 results for “TDS”+ Section 801A(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi80Mumbai61Hyderabad45Kolkata30Ahmedabad25Bangalore18Indore13Jaipur10Chennai7Cuttack7Patna6Rajkot5Nagpur4Lucknow3Raipur2Calcutta1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 80I149Section 8034Deduction30Section 153A20Section 143(3)19Section 801A13Section 26312Disallowance10Addition to Income9Section 148

SIMPLEX KRITA JV,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 181/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Simplex Krita Jv Ito, Ward-33(1), Kolkata Simplex House, 27, Shakespeare Vs Sarani, Kolkata-700017. Pan: Aalas 5699 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal In Ita No. 181/Kol/2023 For A.Y. 2016-17 Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Ld. Cit In Short], Dated 25.01.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 80Section 80I

4) Kolkata Vs. M/s Somdatt Builders Simplex JV in ITA 470/Kol/2015 for the Assessment Year 2011-12 vide order dated 05.07.2017. The relevant operative portion of the said order is reproduced below:- “8. Heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the only question is to be decided by us for allowance of deduction

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 801A(4)6
TDS4

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS JV, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 691/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-33, M/S Simplex Somdatt बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, Builders, Simplex House, / 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-71 27, Shkespeare Sarani, V/S. Kokata-17 [Pan No.Aagas 1619 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 24-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 06-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata Dated 29.01.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-33 Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 23.12.2014 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1) In The Fact & Circumstance Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)-9, Kolkata Has Erred In Allowing The Deduction Of Rs.82,56,250/- U/S 80Ia 2) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)-9,Kolkata Has Erred In Treating The Assessee As Developer Not Contractor. 3) The Ld. Cit(A)-9, Kolkata Has Erred In Not Adhering To The Explanation To Section 80Ia (Introduced By The Finance Act, 2007). 4) The Depart Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Amend An Ground Of Grounds Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

4 8. Heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the only question is to be decided by us for allowance of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act as to whether the assessee is a developer or a works contractor. The AO found that the assessee claimed TDS credit of the amounts deducted

ITO, WD-33(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SUBHASH JV, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 390/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Us The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submits That The Issue In Hand Regarding Claim Of Deduction U/S. 80Ia Of The Act Is Covered By The Consolidated Order Dt:18-06-2013 Of The Kolkata Tribunal, ‘B‘ Bench, Kolkata In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita No. 1684/Kol/2011 & Ita No. 1685/Kol/2011 For The A.Y 2007-08. The Ld. Ar Also Submits That The 1 M/S. Simplex Subhash J.V

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT –DRFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 801ASection 80I

801A of the Act, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word “contractor” is used .to denote a person entering into

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS JV, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 690/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(2)Section 80I

801A of the Act, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word “contractor” is used .to denote a person entering into

ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX MEINHARDT JOINT VENTURE, KOLKATA

In the result, both the above appeals of revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 693/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(2)Section 80I

801A of the Act, a person being a company has to enter into an agreement with the Government or Government undertakings. Such an agreement is a contract and for the purpose of the agreement a person may be called as a contractor as he entered into a contract. But the word “contractor” is used .to denote a person entering into

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL./JOINT/DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

ITA 175/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukuga Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 801ASection 801A(4)Section 801A(4)(i)

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

M/S BOTHRA SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-9(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2324/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukuga Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 144C(5)Section 80Section 801ASection 801A(4)Section 801A(4)(i)

section 801A(4)(i) by observing that there is no condition to transfer the infrastructural facility to the GoAP or Specified Authority without considering the fact that this condition has been deleted by the Finance Act, 2001. 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. DRP erred in affirming the action

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

ITA 2402/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2011-2012

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA (4

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

ITA 2441/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA (4

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

ITA 1354/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2012-2013

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA (4

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 279/KOL/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INTRASTRACTURE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 285/KOL/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Dr. M. L. Meena]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

ACIT,CIR-12(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 279/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara& Sri M. Balaganesh] I.T.A. No. 279/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Kolkata...……...………………………..…Appellant M/S. Simplex Projects Pvt. Ltd..................................…………….…………….….……………….…......Respondent 12/1, Nellie Sen Gupta Sarani Kolkata – 700 087 [Pan – Aadcs 8598 R] Appearances By: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, A/R,Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Tiwari, Cit, Sr.Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 12Th,2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 11Th,2018 Order Per S.S. Godara, Jm :- This Revenue’S Appeal For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 17, Kolkata (Hereinafter The ‘Cit(A)’) Dated 29/11/2016 Passed In Case No. 581/Cit(A)-12/Kol./Range- 12/2014-15 Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Section 80-Ia Deduction Claim Of Rs.14,22,39,344/- In Assessment Order Dated 28/12/2010 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 4Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term 'work' to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be 'does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

DCIT, CIR-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SIMPLEX PROJECTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 169/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Nov 2017AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2005-06 Dcit, Cicle-12(2) V/S. M/S Simplex Projects Ltd., Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 12/1, Nelli Sengupta 6Th Floor, Chowringhee Sarani, Kolkaata-700087 Square, Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aadcs 8598 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08-11-2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 20.11.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward-12(2), Kolkata U/S 144/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 27.12.2010 For Assessment Year 2005-06. Shri Saurabh Kumar, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue & Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Ld. Authorized Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1. On The Fact & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred By Treating The Order Of The Ao As Ultra Vires & Annulling The Order Of The Ao By Overlooking The Fact That Assessee Failed To File Any Objection To The Issuance Of Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act Within The Stipulated Time As Per The Provisions Of The Ct Despite Availing Ample Opportunity By Issuing Notices.

Section 144Section 148Section 194CSection 80Section 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 990/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

DCIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS J.V., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 155/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 4Section 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer by using materials purchased from a person, other than such

ITO, WD-33(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SIMPLEX SOMDATT BUILDERS, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 289/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jun 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2008-09 A.Y 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA, ld. Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 4Section 80I

TDS in respect of payment to contractors for carrying out any work in the Explanation thereto as explained the term ‘work’ to be an inclusive definition, but has provided an exclusion to be ITA Nos. 289 & 290/Kol/2014 3 M/s.Simplex Somdatt Builders JV ‘does not include manufacturing or supplying of a product. according to requirement or specification of the customer

M/S/ RASHMI METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A/DCIT, CC-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 813/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 801A(4)Section 80ISection 80l

801A(4) for your Private Railway Sidings. It appears that you have developed and owned two private sidings situated from Nimpura to Gokulpur in West Bengal and Barajamda to Barbil in Odisha and that you have entered into two separate agreements with South Eastern Railways. Perusal of agreements reveals the following: : (i) The private siding was not an infrastructure facility

M/S/ RASHMI METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A/DCIT, CC-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 814/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 801A(4)Section 80ISection 80l

801A(4) for your Private Railway Sidings. It appears that you have developed and owned two private sidings situated from Nimpura to Gokulpur in West Bengal and Barajamda to Barbil in Odisha and that you have entered into two separate agreements with South Eastern Railways. Perusal of agreements reveals the following: : (i) The private siding was not an infrastructure facility

M/S/ RASHMI METALIKS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A/DCIT, CC-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 815/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 801A(4)Section 80ISection 80l

801A(4) for your Private Railway Sidings. It appears that you have developed and owned two private sidings situated from Nimpura to Gokulpur in West Bengal and Barajamda to Barbil in Odisha and that you have entered into two separate agreements with South Eastern Railways. Perusal of agreements reveals the following: : (i) The private siding was not an infrastructure facility