TAN BOON HOE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAUTILYA BHAVAN MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year : 2011-12

TDS amounting to Rs. 14,78,140/- against the corresponding income of Rs. 52,70,290/-. Basis the same, the 3 Ld.CIT(A) held that section

BAKHTAWAR CONSTRUCTION CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6943/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Bakhtawar Construction Co. Addl. Cit (Tds) Rg 1 P. Ltd, Meher House, 10T H Floor, K.G. Mittal 1St Floor, Casasji Patel Street Ayurvedic Hosptial Bldg, V. Fort, Bombay 400001 Charni Road(W) Mumbai 400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacb4942P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS returns. The question which arises is whether in the abovesaid scenario, can the provisions of section 273B of the Act can be applied in order to decide the issue of levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. 24. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court

THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS) 2, MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1999/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ The Board Of Control For Acit (Tds) 2 Cricket In India, R.No. 701, 7 Th Floor, Wankhede Stadium, Smt. K.G. Mittal V. “D” Road, Churchgate, Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai 400020 Bldg., Charni Road, Mumbai-400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaatb0186A (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Nitesh Joshi Shri. Anil Sathe Revenue By : Shri. D.G Pansari , Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1999/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Date 10.01.2017 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-60, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2011-12, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Penalty Order Dated 16.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 272A(2)(K) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2011-12. I.T.A. No.1999/Mum/2017

Section 273B of the 1961 Act. It was submitted that the assessee has gradually improved in filing of TDS returns in time and subsequently quarterly TDS returns were either filed in time within due date or small delay took place. The assessee relied upon decision I.T.A. No.1999/Mum/2017 of Lucknow Tribunal in the case of PNB v. ACIT (2011) 140

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS on salaries was deleted. A The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Ltd. (140 ITR 832) has held that the provisions of section

JCIT(TDS)(OSD)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2104/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Jcit(Tds)(Osd)-2(3) बिधम/ M/S. Zee Entertainment Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Enterprises Ltd. Vs. 18Th Floor, Marathon Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayarvedic Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Hospital Building, Charni Lower Parel, Mumbai- Road (W), Mumbai-400002. 400013. C. O. No. 105/M/2019 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2104/Mum/2018) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Zee Entertainment बिधम/ Jcit(Tds)(Osd)-2(3) Room No. 718, 7Th Floor, Enterprises Ltd. Vs. 18Th Floor, Marathon Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Hospital Building, Charni Lower Parel, Mumbai- Road (W), Mumbai-400002. 400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz0243R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Dr. Narender Kumar (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Jay Bhansali सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/07/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal As Well As Cross-Objection Against The Order Dated 24.01.2018 Passed Co No.105/M/2019 A.Y.2011-12 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -60, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011-12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

140 of 2016 titled as CIT TDS-2, Mumbai Vs. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. (2018) (92 taxmann.com 30) (Bom) has given the following finding: - “2. The Revenue has urged the following substantial questions of law four our consideration :- (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the placement

ITO (TDS) 2(3), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA TOURISM DEVELOPEMENT CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri D. Karunakar Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer(Tds)- M/S Maharashtra Tourism 2(3), Development Corporation Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.708, 7Th Floor, Express Tower, 9Th Floor, Vs. Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Madam Cama Road, Hospital Building, Nariman Point, Charni Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400002 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacm0712G

TDS on amounts retained by the banks in respect of air tickets booked through credit cards. 5. The AO has stated break up of the amounts retained by the various banks from the air tickets sold through the credit cards in respect of Financial Years relevant to the assessment years under consideration as under : 14 M/s Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation

DCIT-1(3)(1), , MUMBAI vs. M/S FUTURE ENTERPRISES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS under section 194H of the Act. This issue has also been decided in favour of the assessee by various Tribunals in the following cases:  Gems Paradise v. ACIT [IT Appeal No. 746 (JP) of 2011, dated 2.2.2012  Bhandari Jewellers v. ACIT [IT Appeal No. 745 (JP) of 2011, dated 2-2- 2012]  Tata Teleservices

COLE PARMER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly grounds are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 957/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

TDS provisions (like Section 194C, Section 1941, etc.) are not applicable to shared service expenses. In respect of this, the Appellant places reliance on the following judicial precedents: • Bhagyanagar Gas Limited vs. ACIT [140

ABB SWITZERLAND LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADIT 1(1),

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

140/-. The case was not selected for scrutiny assessment and no assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed in this case. It is seen that the assessee has not offered an income of Rs.17,26,161/- received from M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd on which though TDS was done, but it was not offered to tax. Only

ABB SWITZERLAND LTD,BANGALORE vs. ADIT 1(1),

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

140/-. The case was not selected for scrutiny assessment and no assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed in this case. It is seen that the assessee has not offered an income of Rs.17,26,161/- received from M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd on which though TDS was done, but it was not offered to tax. Only

STAR INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 16(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Star India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Cit 16(1) Room No.467, 4Th Floor Star House, Urmi Estate 95, Ganpat Rao Kadam Mumbai Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn1335Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

140). The assessee claimed that deduction of tax at source on the impugned payment had been done under section 194C of the Act by way of abundant caution. 7.5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the primary facts stated hereinabove mentioning the purpose of payment of channel placement fees

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. STAR ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA P. LTD, GURGAON

In the result, C.O. raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

TDs @ 10% under section 194J of the Act. According to the AO, this was clarified by Finance Act, 2012 by way of insertion of an explanation to section 9 of the Act. The AO relied on the decisions of the delhi Tribunal in the case of Asia Satellite Telecommunication Co. Ltd. CI-I- (322 ITR 140

DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

140 | | IV. | Registration charges | 40,28,351 | | V. | Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and | 2,26,826 | | | Wales, United Kingdom | | | VI. | Reimbursement of expenses | 1,46,43,370 | | | TOTAL | 5,49,85,333 | 1:2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject, no disallowance u/s.40