TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT-1, MUMBAI

797/Mum/2018

section 92B r/w Explanation-1(c). Since, the aforesaid legal and factual aspects have not been considered properly, we are inclined to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessing Officer must examine all relevant facts to find out the exact nature

ASIAN PIPES & PROFILES P. LTD,AMBERNATH vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A(1)(a) and (c) of the Act. Accordingly, we reverse the findings of CIT(A) in this regard

ASIAN PIPES & PROFILES P. LTD,AMBERNATH vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A(1)(a) and (c) of the Act. Accordingly, we reverse the findings of CIT(A) in this regard

DISHA DISTRIBUTORS,MUMBAI vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A(1)(a) and (c) of the Act. Accordingly, we reverse the findings of CIT(A) in this regard

CORNERVIEW CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 9TDS) - CPC, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

TDS statements under section 200(3) of the Act read with rule 26QB, there is no error on the part of the Assessing Officer in computing fee under section 234E of the Act while processing such statements. 14

SPRING TIME CLUBS & HOSPITALITY SERVICES P.LTD,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Sprigtime Clubs & Hospitality Assessing Officer, Tds Ward Services Pvt. Ltd. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road Vs. 2Nd Floor, Sprig Avenue, Club Road Kalyan (W), 421301 Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan – Aaocs9107M Appellant Respondent

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A(1)(a) and (c) of the Act. Accordingly, we reverse the findings of CIT(A) in this regard

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETINGS INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS section 201 is determined default under (1) of ₹ of ₹ 19,852,417 section 201 53,350,000 and interest (1) is of ₹ and interest under section 4,112,942 under section 201 (1A) of Rs. and interest 201 (1A) of ₹ 115,14

SHRI RAJESH RAMCHANDRA DAKE,PANVEL vs. DY CIT CC-1, MUMBAI

14, 2010 under Section 143(3) of the Act assessing the total income of the Assessee at Rs.37,81,900/-. The AO in the assessment order dated March 31, 2016 under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Act has also made two additions of Rs.6,81,11,103/- on account of brokerage income and Rs.10

SPRING TIME CLUBS & HOSPITALITY SERVICES P.LTD,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. However, after 01.06.15 the Assessing Authority is well within his limit to levy fee under section 234E of the Act even while processing the statement under section 200A and making adjustment. The relevant part of the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal for the sake of completeness is reproduced

SANJAY SATISHCHANDRA DUTT,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. However, after 01.06.15 the Assessing Authority is well within his limit to levy fee under section 234E of the Act even while processing the statement under section 200A and making adjustment. The relevant part of the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal for the sake of completeness is reproduced

MILESTONE SPACE,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. However, after 01.06.15 the Assessing Authority is well within his limit to levy fee under section 234E of the Act even while processing the statement under section 200A and making adjustment. The relevant part of the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal for the sake of completeness is reproduced

MILESTONE ESTATE,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. However, after 01.06.15 the Assessing Authority is well within his limit to levy fee under section 234E of the Act even while processing the statement under section 200A and making adjustment. The relevant part of the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal for the sake of completeness is reproduced