LATE JAYESH THAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub- section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: section

LATE JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub- section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: section

LAWMEN CONCEPTS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CPC-TDS , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

NATIONAL LAMINATE CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. CPC (TDS), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FUTURA VALUE RETAIL LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Acit-9(3)(2), M/S. Future Value 418, 4Th Floor, Retail Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Knowledge House, V. Mumbai-400020 Shyam Nagar, Off Jogeshwari Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai-400060 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaecp3041P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Sushil Kumar Poddar (Dr) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 6705/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 23.08.2016, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16,Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) In Ita No. Cit(A)/ I.T.305/Dcit-9(3)(2)/2015-16, For Assessment Year 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016

197A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) number S.O. 3069 (E) dated 31st December, 2012, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), the Central Government hereby notifies that no deduction of tax under

BOMBAY MERCANTILE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. TDS WARD 1(1)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

section 197A(1) or 197A(1A) of the Act. 7) Without prejudice that, the Learned ITO(TDS) erred in not appreciating

DCIT (OSD) 8(1), MUMBAI vs. FUTURE VALUE RETAIL LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2612/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ M/S Future Value Retail Tax (Osd), Range 8(1), Ltd., V. Room No. 260A, 2 Nd Floor, Knowledge House, Aayakar Bhavan, Shyam Nagar, M.K. Road, Off Jvlr, Mumbai 400 020. Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai- 400 072. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaecp3041P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS u/s 194H of the Act on commission paid to credit card companies by the assessee company by holding the same to bank charges. 6. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A) dated 29-01-2014, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The ld. D.R. fairly conceded that this issue is squarely covered in favour

SHRI MANOJ PREMCHAND DHARMANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 22(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Manoj Premchand Dharmani, The Income Tax Officer 22(2)(3), Prop. Of M/S Drishti Trade House, Vashi Railway Station Complex, B-503, Swami Jairamdas Vashi Navi Mumbai - 400703 Shopping Centre, R.C. Marg, Vs. Chembur, Mumbai - 400071 Pan: Aegpd3228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vikash Kr Agarwal (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 02/01/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2019

TDS against declaration under Section 197A. 7. The learned Assessing Officer is not justified in making an addition of Rs. 24,57,351/- on account

ACIT 25(2), MUMBAI vs. KANTILAL P. SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

TDS as per section 197A. If there is any default regarding submission of Form No. 15G/15H with the department, the AO can initiate

ACIT 25(2), MUMBAI vs. HIMANSHU K MODI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby Dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6866/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asst. Commissioner Of Shri Himanshu K. Modi बनाम/ Income Tax 25(2) Prop.M/S.Vitrag Vs. Room No.108, 1St Floor, Construction, C-4/406, Bldg. No.C-11, Yogi Nagar, Borivali (W) Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400091 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpm8724B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS) before the due date of return of income which he failed to do and therefore, the AO has made a disallowance u/s.40A(ia). During appeal, the appellant has once again reiterated the argument that considering the Section 194A r.w.s. 197A

ITO (TDS)- 2(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. RAINBOW DEVICES TRUST, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1446/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-2020) Ito (Tds)-2(1)(4) बिधम/ M/S. Rainbow Devices Trust Room No.612, 6Th Floor, K. C/O. Axis Trustee Services Vs. G. Mittal Ayurvedic Ltd. 2Nd Floor, 29 South West, Hospital Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400002. Ruby It Park (Ruby Mills) Dadar (W), Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aadtr3790H आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1447/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-2020) बिधम/ Ito (Tds)-2(1)(4) M/S. Rent-A- Device Trust Room No.612, 6Th Floor, K. C/O. Axis Trustee Services Vs. G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Ltd. 2Nd Floor, 29 South West, Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400002. Ruby It Park (Ruby Mills) Dadar (West), Mumbai- 400028. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadtr4732R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS." 1. The AO has computed interest payable under Section 201(1A) of the Act from 1 April 2018. A.Y. 2019-20 2. The Appellant‟s Contention can be summarized on following points: 3. The Order has been passed by the AO based on the reading of various clauses of the rent agreement entered into between

THE MUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS was not deducted. However, it has pointed out before us that the CBDT has issued a notification dated 17/06/2016 being Notification No.47 of 2016, The Municipal Co-operative Bank Ltd wherein it has categorically directed that any payment system authorised by RBI under sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Payment Settlement Systems of 2007, no deduction

THE MUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CIRCLE-1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS was not deducted. However, it\nhas pointed out before us that the CBDT has issued a\nnotification dated 17/06/2016 being Notification No.47 of 2016,\nwherein it has categorically directed that any payment system\nauthorised by RBI under sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the\nPayment Settlement Systems of 2007, no deduction of tax under\nChapter XVII shall