DCIT-15(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S KELLOGG INDIA PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 195A and thereafter, TDS on gross amount was to be deducted @15%. Thus, there was a shortfall of TDS

KELLOGG INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 195A and thereafter, TDS on gross amount was to be deducted @15%. Thus, there was a shortfall of TDS

ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. KELLOGG INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 195A and thereafter, TDS on gross amount was to be deducted @15%. Thus, there was a shortfall of TDS

M/S. ICICI SECURITIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAX WARD)2(2) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

section 195A of the Act cannot be applied for computing the amount liable for TDS as there was no agreement

ITO 9(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. BHADRECHA CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3304/Mum/2015 & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3305/Mum/2015

TDS payments before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), after perusing all these contentions / documentary evidences came to the conclusion that the assessee was covered by the Assessment Year 2007-08 provisions of Section 195A

ITO 9(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. BHADRECHA CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3304/Mum/2015 & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3305/Mum/2015

TDS payments before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), after perusing all these contentions / documentary evidences came to the conclusion that the assessee was covered by the Assessment Year 2007-08 provisions of Section 195A

DCIT 6(2), MUMBAI vs. KPMG ADVISORY SERVICES P. LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

195A of the Income-tax Act, 1961; and (ii) deletion made by the CIT(A) towards support service charges excluding rent paid u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. The brief facts of the case extracted from ITA No. 4556/Mum/2013 4. are that the assessee company part of global network of KPMG, engaged in the business of consultancy services

MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CENTRAL RANGE -7 (2), MUMBAI

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

TDS deducted and deposited by the assesse on behalf bondholders was treated as part of that. Besides we note that claim was in accordance with section 195A

RED HAT INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) RG II, PUNE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Pawan Singh

195A of the Act; Levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act 5. erred in levying in interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271C of the Act 6. erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271C of the Act.” 4. Ground No. 1 4.1 In this ground the assessee challenges

RED HAT INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) RG II, PUNE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Pawan Singh

195A of the Act; Levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act 5. erred in levying in interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271C of the Act 6. erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271C of the Act.” 4. Ground No. 1 4.1 In this ground the assessee challenges

ITO(IT)1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ATOS WORLDWIDE INDIA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 6424/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिाम/ Ito(It)1(1)(2) Atos Worldwide India Pvt. R.No. 113, First Floor, Ltd. Scindia House, N.M. Road, 701, Interface-11, V. Ballard Estate, New Link Road, Mumbai- 400038 Malad(W), Mumbai-400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaace2403J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS are advised to obtain PAN latest by 31.03.2010 and communicate the same to their deductors before income-tax is actually deducted on transaction after that date. The AO also relied upon the provisions of Section 2(37A)(iii) r.w.s 195 as well Section 90A, 195A

M/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DDIT (IT) - 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.987/मुं/2008से आअसं .989/मुं/2008

section 195A of the Act) and education cess @ 2%. The Assessing Officer also passed the order dated 27/10/2006 u/s. 195(2) of the Act on similar lines rejecting contentions of the assessee. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide impugned order in principle upheld the observation of the Assessing Officer

M/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DDIT (IT) - 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.987/मुं/2008से आअसं .989/मुं/2008

section 195A of the Act) and education cess @ 2%. The Assessing Officer also passed the order dated 27/10/2006 u/s. 195(2) of the Act on similar lines rejecting contentions of the assessee. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide impugned order in principle upheld the observation of the Assessing Officer

M/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DDIT (IT) - 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.987/मुं/2008से आअसं .989/मुं/2008

section 195A of the Act) and education cess @ 2%. The Assessing Officer also passed the order dated 27/10/2006 u/s. 195(2) of the Act on similar lines rejecting contentions of the assessee. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide impugned order in principle upheld the observation of the Assessing Officer

BOB FINANCIAL SOLUTION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 115JB and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai erred in confirming the same.” 2. The learned counsel for assessee, at the outset, submitted that both the issues are covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case. The copies of the orders have been placed on record

DY CIT CC 7 (2), MUMBAI vs. M/S MAN GLOBAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee in CO Nos

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7440/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7533/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7534/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7535/Mum/2019 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2014-15) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7536/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2015-16)

section 37 of the Act which reads as under: 37. (1) Any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described In sections 30 to 36 [**] and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for - the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing