DCIT - 1 (1) (2), MUMBAI vs. FORBES & COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal

TDS should have been deducted and has disallowed Rs. 225067/- for want of TDS deduction. The AR has explained the disallowance

EQUINOX LABS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed partly

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Equinox Labs Pvt. Ltd, Commissioner Of Income-Tax 224, Plot-3/3A, Unique Indu (Appeals), Strial Estate, Swatantra Veer Vs. Room No. 245-A, North Block, Sawarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, New Delhi-110 001. Mumbai-400025. Pan No. Aaece 7062 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Kishor Chaudhari, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ashish Heliwal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 14/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 29/12/2022

disallowed TDS credit of The Ld. AO has disallowed TDS credit of ₹47,011/- on The Ld. AO has disallowed

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. UTV ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit – 16(1) V. M/S. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd., 1St Floor, Building No. 14 Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Solitaire Corporate Park M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Guru Hargovind Marg, Chakala Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaccv4782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain Department By : M. Samatha

disallowance made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under the provisions of section 194J

ITO 21 (1) (5), MUMBAI vs. JANSEVA MAJOOR SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT, MUMBAI

In the result, ground 1 of assessee’s appeal is allowed and

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri S Rifaur Rahman (Am) Ito 21(1)(5), Room No. Vs M/S Janseva Majoor Sahakari 120, 1Stfloor, Piramal Sanstha Maryadit, Chambers, Parel, 1, Dev Darshan, Ground Floor, Mumbai-400016 In Front Of Wakade House T.H. Kataria Marg, Mahim, Mumbai-400 016 Pan : Aadfj0626J Appellant Respondednt M/S Janseva Majoor Sahakari Vs Ito 21(1)(5), Room No. 120, 1Stfloor, Piramal Sanstha Maryadit, 1, Dev Darshan, Ground Floor, Chambers, Parel, In Front Of Wakade House Mumbai-400016 T.H. Kataria Marg, Mahim, Mumbai-400 016 Pan : Aadfj0626J Appellant Respondednt

TDS has been deducted, presuming that section 194C is applicable. Further disallowance of Rs.1.42 crores on which TDS of Rs.1.61

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTECHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ) ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-50, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mahadhan Agritech Ltd. (Formerly Cit(A)-50, Dcit Cen. 8(1), Known As Smartchem Technologies 656, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ltd.), Mumbai-400021. Survey No. 93, Sai Hira, Mundhwa, Pune-411036. Pan No. Aacca 5046 P Appellant Respondent

disallowance of interest on delayed payment of TDS and disallowance of interest on delayed payment of TDS and disallowance of interest

SHETH REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-CC-7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Arun Khodpiashri Sandeep Singh Karhailsheth Realtors Vasant Oasis, Site Office, Upper Basement, Cts No.345A 1 To 3, 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri (East), ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400059 Pan: Aavfa3975F

TDS. 2.2. The Ld. AO erred in disallowing Rs. 4,15,168/- for interest on late payment of TDS without

M/S. BHANSALI TRADE IMPEX,,GIRGAON vs. ITO-19(1)(2),, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

disallowing expenditure incurred which was subject to TDS, it has computed the TDS amount of such expenditure and has disallowed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. SHETH REALTORS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

disallowing for interest on late payment of TDS & Service Tax without appreciating the fact that interest on late payment of TDS

SHETH REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ITO-7(1) (ERSTWHILE ITO-23(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

disallowing for interest on late payment of TDS & Service Tax without appreciating the fact that interest on late payment of TDS

SAPIENS TECHNOLOGIES(1982) INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

TDS, Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed entire salary payments amounting to ₹.78,61,627/-. On appeal

SAPIENS TECHNOLOGIES (1982) INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- 6(3)(1),, MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

TDS, Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed entire salary payments amounting to ₹.78,61,627/-. On appeal

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. T.V. VISION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2012-

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Acit -16(1), M/S T.V. Vision Ltd., Room No. 439, 4Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Adhikari Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Oberoi Complex, New Link Road, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400053 Pan: Aacct7276Q

disallowance of expenses for less TDS should be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The authorized representative of the assessee

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. T.V. VISION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Acit -16(1), M/S T.V. Vision Ltd., Room No. 439, 4Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Adhikari Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Oberoi Complex, New Link Road, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400053 Pan: Aacct7276Q

disallowance of expenses for less TDS should be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The authorized representative of the assessee

IPHONLINE LIMITED (NOW AS ASAPP INFO GLOBAL SERVIES PVT LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's Appeal is partly allowed, in the\nabove terms

disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS on\npayments made under various heads of expenditure.\n3. Rs.18,48,077/- disallowance

M/S. SAHYOG HOMES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

disallowance of interest on late payment of TDS, disallowance of interest on unsecured loan, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance

M/S. SAHYOG HOMES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (A) -8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

disallowance of interest on late payment of TDS, disallowance of interest on unsecured loan, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance

M/S. SAHYOG HOMES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR 6(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

disallowance of interest on late payment of TDS, disallowance of interest on unsecured loan, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance

M/S. SAHYOG HOMES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT -11(1) (2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

disallowance of interest on late payment of TDS, disallowance of interest on unsecured loan, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance