DCIT CEN CIR 8(4), MUMBAI vs. SAVITA OIL TECHNOLOGIES LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7620/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

199), advance tax (section 209) or by way of self-assessment tax (section 140A). In addition, where the assessment is completed at an income higher than the returned income, the tax payable by the assessee is specified in the notice of demand issued under section 156 of the Act. Where there is a shortfall in payment

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

1,16,95,21,997/- as against the total TDS claimed, resulting in short grant of credit. 102. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee is legally entitled to the TDS credit under section 199

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

1,16,95,21,997/- as against the total TDS claimed, resulting in short grant of credit. (47) ITA No. 6663, 6701, 6702 & 6703 /Mum/2025 Aditya Birla Sun Life AMC Limited 102. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee is legally entitled to the TDS credit under section 199

SANJEEV RAJENDRA PANDIT,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CPC) , MUMBAI

In the result, both these appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 Sanjeev Rajendra Pandit, The Assistant Director Of Top Floor Madhav Vilas, 8 Income Tax (Cpc), Setalwad Road, Off Neapean Vs. Post Bag No.2, Electronic Sea Road, Cumballa Hill, S.O., City Post Office, Mumbai-400026. Bangalore-560500. Pan No. Agypp 4026 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Milin Dattani, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Aditya M. Rai, Dr : Date Of Hearing 18/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2023

TDS as per the provisions of section 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. of section 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The learne 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without d CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without appreciating that the tax on the rent and dividend had appreciating that

SANJEEV RAJENDRA PANDIT,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CPC), MUMBAI

In the result, both these appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 Sanjeev Rajendra Pandit, The Assistant Director Of Top Floor Madhav Vilas, 8 Income Tax (Cpc), Setalwad Road, Off Neapean Vs. Post Bag No.2, Electronic Sea Road, Cumballa Hill, S.O., City Post Office, Mumbai-400026. Bangalore-560500. Pan No. Agypp 4026 D Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Milin Dattani, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Aditya M. Rai, Dr : Date Of Hearing 18/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2023

TDS as per the provisions of section 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. of section 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The learne 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without d CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without appreciating that the tax on the rent and dividend had appreciating that

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

1) of the Act specifically w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and submitted that there is nothing therein to suggest that the said amendment was clarificatory or retrospective in nature and therefore in respect of TDS statements filed for the period prior to 01.06.2015, late fees chargeable under section 234E of the Act could not be levied by the Assessing Officer

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

1) of the Act specifically w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and submitted that there is nothing therein to suggest that the said amendment was clarificatory or retrospective in nature and therefore in respect of TDS statements filed for the period prior to 01.06.2015, late fees chargeable under section 234E of the Act could not be levied by the Assessing Officer

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

1) of the Act specifically w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and submitted that there is nothing therein to suggest that the said amendment was clarificatory or retrospective in nature and therefore in respect of TDS statements filed for the period prior to 01.06.2015, late fees chargeable under section 234E of the Act could not be levied by the Assessing Officer

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

1) of the Act specifically w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and submitted that there is nothing therein to suggest that the said amendment was clarificatory or retrospective in nature and therefore in respect of TDS statements filed for the period prior to 01.06.2015, late fees chargeable under section 234E of the could not be levied by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the intimation

PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

section 40(a)(i) of the Act and tax should have been deducted at source by the assessee firm u/s 195 of the Act or an application should have been made by the assessee firm for no deduction of tax at source u/s 195(2) of the Act . Thus the AO held that these payments to non-resident by assessee

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

section 40(a)(i) of the Act and tax should have been deducted at source by the assessee firm u/s 195 of the Act or an application should have been made by the assessee firm for no deduction of tax at source u/s 195(2) of the Act . Thus the AO held that these payments to non-resident by assessee

TOTAL OIL INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 8(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

1). While interpreting a Section one has to give weightage to every word used in that section. While interpreting the provisions of the Income Tax Act one cannot read the charging Sections of that Act de hors the machinery Sections. The Act is to be read as an integrated Code. 17. Section 195 appears in Chapter XVII which deals with

ACIT 11(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL OIL INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

1). While interpreting a Section one has to give weightage to every word used in that section. While interpreting the provisions of the Income Tax Act one cannot read the charging Sections of that Act de hors the machinery Sections. The Act is to be read as an integrated Code. 17. Section 195 appears in Chapter XVII which deals with

BRIG RESOLUTION SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2020-21

199 is only to answer the question as to the year in which the credit for TDS shall be given. It year in which the credit for TDS shall be given. It year in which the credit for TDS shall be given. It links up the credit with assessment year in which such links up the credit with assessment year

PFIZER LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2) (2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Pfizer Limited The Capital, 1802/1901, Acit-14(2)(2) Plot No.C-70, G-Block, 461, 4T H Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp3334M

1‟. It is unclear that whether this project has any relation to the amalgamation expenses. The ld. CIT – A held that if the expenditure is related to the amalgamation than 1/5 of deduction under section ITA No.2108, 2132/Mum/2018 & CO 110/Mum/2019; A.Y. 2014-15 35DD may be granted. The response of the assessee was also obtained and after that the learned

ACIT - 14(2) (2), MUMBAI vs. PFIZER LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Pfizer Limited The Capital, 1802/1901, Acit-14(2)(2) Plot No.C-70, G-Block, 461, 4T H Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp3334M

1‟. It is unclear that whether this project has any relation to the amalgamation expenses. The ld. CIT – A held that if the expenditure is related to the amalgamation than 1/5 of deduction under section ITA No.2108, 2132/Mum/2018 & CO 110/Mum/2019; A.Y. 2014-15 35DD may be granted. The response of the assessee was also obtained and after that the learned

DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 1995-96 Dcit-2(2)(1), M/S State Bank Of India, R. No.545, Financial Reporting & बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Taxation Department, 3Rd Vs. M.K. Road, Floor, Corporate Centre, Mumbai-400020 State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacs8577K

199, but with respect to other tax under section 244A(1)(b), the interest shall be payable even if the amount is less than 10 % of the tax as determined under section 143(1)or on regular assessment, because there is no proviso to section 244A(1)(b) as provided under section 244A(1)(a) of the Act. viii.Under

UTI MUTUAL FUND,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRALISED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, TRACES, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2295/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Uti Mutual Fund, Dcit, Centralised Gn Block, Uti Tower, Processing Cell-Tds, Bandra Complex, Traces, V. Bandra (E), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai-400051 Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Up- 201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaatu1088L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Krupa Gandhi Revenue By: Shri. Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being

TDS is deducted in the month of October 2013 but paid in November 2013, the interest is computed by taking delay for 2 months and hence the differential demand for interest payable raised by Revenue to the tune of Rs.4,19,060/- ,vide intimation dated 30.03.2014 issued by learned DCIT under Section 200A of the 1961 Act. We have observed