UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU (2), MUMBAI

199 ITD 570\nwhich was concerned with assessment year 2019-20.\n29. Mr. Pardiwala submitted that even if it is assumed that the\nview is taken that the assessee's case would fall within clause (b)\nof sub-section (2) of section 115JB, then, attention is invited to\nfirst proviso below the said sub-section (2). According to the said

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

199 ITD 570\nwhich was concerned with assessment year 2019-20.\n29. Mr. Pardiwala submitted that even if it is assumed that the\nview is taken that the assessee's case would fall within clause (b)\nof sub-section (2) of section 115JB, then, attention is invited to\nfirst proviso below the said sub-section (2). According to the said

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 @ 20% 1. S1S0061657 S1S0061657 ₹10,290 ₹2,058 2,058 2. S1S0036608 S1S0036608 ₹3,04,820 60,964 60,964 3. S1S0035964 S1S0035964 ₹7,180 1,436 1,436 Total 3,22,290 ₹64,458 64,458 6.2 In respect of dividend income due to non In respect of dividend income due to non-providing of PAN to roviding

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 @ 20% 1. S1S0061657 S1S0061657 ₹10,290 ₹2,058 2,058 2. S1S0036608 S1S0036608 ₹3,04,820 60,964 60,964 3. S1S0035964 S1S0035964 ₹7,180 1,436 1,436 Total 3,22,290 ₹64,458 64,458 6.2 In respect of dividend income due to non In respect of dividend income due to non-providing of PAN to roviding

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

2,22,000/-. The assessee therefore restricted its claim to he assessee therefore restricted its claim to ₹1,66,500/- only. 2.3 The Ld. CIT(A) acknowledged that the assessee was legally The Ld. CIT(A) acknowledged that the assessee was legally The Ld. CIT(A) acknowledged that the assessee was legally entitled to TDS credit corresponding to the income

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

2)(k) of the Act for late filing of TDS statements / returns. In this regard, reference is being made to the relevant provisions of the Act. Under Chapter XVII of the Act, duty is upon the person making certain payments to deduct tax at source under the respective sections. The said tax deducted at source

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS arises under the IT Act only if the amount due and payable assumes the nature of payment specified under Chapter XVII-B thereof. 13. Even assuming specific cases of payment under Chapter XVII-B of the IT Act are considered, Sections 193 and 194A of the IT Act deals with provisions relating to deduction of tax at source

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) ..

2)(k). It is admitted that clause (k), which requires a person to deliver or cause to be delivered copy of the statement within time specified under section 200(3), was applicable in the case of the assessee. Under the provisions of section 200(3) read with Rule 31A, a person deducting tax at sources is required to prepare

STOCK HOLDING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 8 (2) (2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Stock Holding Corporation Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income – India Ltd., Tax, Range -8(2)(2), Unit No. 301, 3Rd Floor, Peninsula Room No. 615, Center Point, Opp. Bharat Mata Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Cinema, Dr. Babasaheb Maharishi Karve Road, Ambedkar Road, Parel, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400012 Pan: Aabcs1429B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akram Khan (Ar) Revenue By : Shri B K Bagchi (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/01/2022

2,55,60,477/- is reflecting in form 26AS of immediately succeeding assessment year 2012-13. Statement giving the TAN, Name of the parties and TDS amount was submitted before the Assessing Officer (page no. 16 of the compilation). ii) TDS credit of Rs. 4,11,945/- is not reflecting in the form 26AS of the assessment years. However, TDS

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS, the Dy. CIT had passed an order under section 154 of the Act (see pages 3-5 of Factual paper book-1). 4 25.08.2003 The Dy. CIT issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Act, selecting the Assessee’s ROI for scrutiny (see page 6 of Factual paper book-1). 5 17.10.2003 The Addl. CIT (Transfer Pricing

DZ BANK INDIA REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of the recalled grounds, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dz Bank, India Representative Dcit (International Taxation) Office C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, Range-2(1)(2), 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Vs. 16Th Floor, Room No. 1612, Air Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabcd 6455 E Appellant Respondent

2) of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount with interest as stat with interest as stated above is paid to the Central ed above is paid to the Central Government, there shall be a charge upon

DZ BANK INDIA REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of the recalled grounds, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dz Bank, India Representative Dcit (International Taxation) Office C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, Range-2(1)(2), 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Vs. 16Th Floor, Room No. 1612, Air Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabcd 6455 E Appellant Respondent

2) of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount with interest as stat with interest as stated above is paid to the Central ed above is paid to the Central Government, there shall be a charge upon

DZ BANK INDIA REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of the recalled grounds, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dz Bank, India Representative Dcit (International Taxation) Office C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, Range-2(1)(2), 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Vs. 16Th Floor, Room No. 1612, Air Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabcd 6455 E Appellant Respondent

2) of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount with interest as stat with interest as stated above is paid to the Central ed above is paid to the Central Government, there shall be a charge upon

DZ BANK INDIA REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee to the extent of the recalled grounds, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dz Bank, India Representative Dcit (International Taxation) Office C/O Srbc & Associates Llp, Range-2(1)(2), 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Vs. 16Th Floor, Room No. 1612, Air Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400028. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabcd 6455 E Appellant Respondent

2) of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount of the Act further provides that till the TDS amount with interest as stat with interest as stated above is paid to the Central ed above is paid to the Central Government, there shall be a charge upon

ACIT 421 MUMBAI, MUMBAI CITY vs. SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

TDS arises under the\nIT Act only if the amount due and payable assumes the nature of payment\nspecified under Chapter XVII-B thereof.\n13. Even assuming specific cases of payment under Chapter XVII-B of the\nIT Act are considered, Sections 193 and 194A of the IT Act deals with\nprovisions relating to deduction of tax at source

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

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

2) is not merely a provision to provide information to the ITO(TDS). It is a provision requiring tax to be deducted at source to be paid to the Revenue by the payer who makes payment to a non-resident. Therefore, Section 195 SRP 74/79 ITXA989.15.doc has to be read in conformity with the charging provisions, i.e., Sections

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

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

2) is not merely a provision to provide information to the ITO(TDS). It is a provision requiring tax to be deducted at source to be paid to the Revenue by the payer who makes payment to a non-resident. Therefore, Section 195 SRP 74/79 ITXA989.15.doc has to be read in conformity with the charging provisions, i.e., Sections

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