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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25

DADIBA KALI PUNDOLE ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMEM TAX -17(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

section 194Q despite acknowledging the fact that the Appellant was an auctioneer, and the TDS was duly deducted and paid into Government Treasury. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant submits that the Assessing Officer/CPC be directed to grant the said TDS credit of Rs. 12,25

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETINGS INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS form No 16. Therefore there is no default on part of the assessee. The learned assessing officer was of the view that the amount of taxes required to be deducted as soon the amount is debited in the books of accounts whereas the claim of the assessee is that it is deducted at the source when the actual ESOP

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

Section 205 of the Act, the revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with interest from the petitioner once again. interest from the petitioner once again. 25

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

Section 205 of the Act, the revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with interest from the petitioner once again. interest from the petitioner once again. 25

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

Section 205 of the Act, the revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with interest from the petitioner once again. interest from the petitioner once again. 25

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

Section 205 of the Act, the revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with revenue cannot recover the TDS amount with interest from the petitioner once again. interest from the petitioner once again. 25

K D LITE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 1(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee\nare allowed

section 194A of the IT Act.\nBeing aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed\nappeal before Ld. CIT(A), however, the same was decided\nagainst the assesse.\nAggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred\nappeal before us and the only ground raised by the\nassessee is with regard to challenging the order of Ld.\nCIT(A) in upholding

K D LITE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 1(3),, MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee\nare allowed

section 194A of the IT Act.\n6. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed\nappeal before Ld. CIT(A), however, the same was decided\nagainst the assesse.\n7.\nAggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred\nappeal before us and the only ground raised by the\nassessee is with regard to challenging the order of Ld.\nCIT

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

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. Hence, the demand notices under Section 200A by the respondent-authority for intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent. 25

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

TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. Hence, the demand notices under Section 200A by the respondent- authority for intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent. 25