MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MMRDA),MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS) CIRCLE - 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5186 & 5187/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बिाम/ Mumbai Metropolitan Region Acit (Tds) Cir-1(3) Development Authority R.No. 703, 7 T H Floor, K.G. (Mmrda) , Bkc, Bandra(E), Mittal Hospital Building, V. Mumbai-400051 Charni Road(W), Mumbai- 400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaatm7106R(Tds Mum16747D) (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS should be deducted as per the provision of section 194J and not as per the provisions of section 194C for the two assessment years. 3) However, the assessee had filed an appeal before the Hon. ITAT for AY 2008-09 & AY 2011-12 which is still pending before the Tribunal The hearing for the two appeals has been fixed

DCIT(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Dcit(Tds)-2(3) Novartis Healthcare Private 320, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill, Limited Mtnl Te Bldg. Peddar Road Vs. 7Th Floor, Inspire Bkc, G Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg Block, Bkc Main Road Mumbai-400 026. Bandra, Mumbai-400 051. Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 121/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year : 2020-21)

TDS under section 194 of the Act. • Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors Association vs. Union of India (2002) (257 ITR 202) (Gujarat HC) (refer page No. 150 to 156 of the legal paper book) • Bharti Cellular Limited (now known as Bharti Airtel Limited) [Civil Appeal No. 7257/2011 (SC)] • Unichem Laboratories Ltd. [ITA Nos. 4592 & 4593/Mum/2014 dated 29 January 2016 (Mumbai ITAT)] affirmed

SUGEE SEVEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS was deducted under section 194IA @ 1%. Without prejudice the assessee submitted that the impugned payments have already been included as income by Shri Premal Dayalal Doshi and taxes have been duly paid. The AO did not accept the contention regarding ownership and for the reason that the assessee could not submit Form 26A

SUGEE SEVEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS was deducted under section 194IA @ 1%. Without prejudice the assessee submitted that the impugned payments have already been included as income by Shri Premal Dayalal Doshi and taxes have been duly paid. The AO did not accept the contention regarding ownership and for the reason that the assessee could not submit Form 26A

SUGEE SEVEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS was deducted under section 194IA @ 1%. Without prejudice the assessee submitted that the impugned payments have already been included as income by Shri Premal Dayalal Doshi and taxes have been duly paid. The AO did not accept the contention regarding ownership and for the reason that the assessee could not submit Form 26A

SUGEE SEVEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS was deducted under section 194IA @ 1%. Without prejudice the assessee submitted that the impugned payments have already been included as income by Shri Premal Dayalal Doshi and taxes have been duly paid. The AO did not accept the contention regarding ownership and for the reason that the assessee could not submit Form 26A

ROYAL WESTERN INDIA TURF CLUB LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT TDS 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2012-13

section 201(1) r.w.s 191 of I.T Act as there is no finding by the AO as to the failure of deductor appellant to pay the tax liability. 4. The CIT(A) has, in view of the facts and circumstances and in law, grossly erred on facts and in law, in upholding that the payment made to owners of race

ANIL KUMAR GANG,JODHPUR vs. ITO 3(1) JODHPUR, JODHPUR

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

26A, recovery of the same cannot be made from employee or credit of TDS cannot be denied. It is, therefore, requested that the credit of TDS of Rs.2,12,350/- is allowed.‖ 2 Assessment Year 2018-2019 The Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal preferred by the Assessee holding as under: ―4.2.1 The appellant in its reply had stated that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (TDS) - 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA COMMUNICATIONS TRANSFORMATION SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

TDS was not deducted, disallowance was\nrequired to be made u/s.40(a)(ia) of 30% of the said amount. The\nassessee suo-moto disallowed the 30% of this amount i.e Rs.\n27,26,85,856/- while computing the taxable income at the time of filing\nof return. In other words, he claimed 70% of the total amount as\ndeduction

CRESCENT CONSTRUCTION CO.,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 22(3), NAVI MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

TDS provisions apply but he is not deemed to be an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act, which provides that if the payee of the such amount computed the same into his income tax return and has paid the due taxes, then such an assessee will not be deemed to be an assessee in default and then

ITO 22(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI vs. CRESCENT CONSTRUCTION, NAVI MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

TDS provisions apply but he is not deemed to be an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act, which provides that if the payee of the such amount computed the same into his income tax return and has paid the due taxes, then such an assessee will not be deemed to be an assessee in default and then

MUMBAI ,METROPLITAN RIGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MMRDA),MUMBAI vs. ITO TDS 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6029/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/ Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6030/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5950/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ – 2(3), Regional Development V. Room No. 708, 7 Th Floor, Authority (Mmrda), Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Bandra Kurla Complex, Hospital Building, Bandra (East), Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 051. Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS as per the provisions of section 194C. We rely on the recent decision of the Hon. Gujarat High court in the case of Essar Oil Ltd. V. ITO-262 ITR 63(Guj).” The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O. vide appellate orders dated 16.07.2014 in second round of litigation by observing as under:- “I have considered

ITO (TDS) 2(3), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6029/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/ Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6030/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5950/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ – 2(3), Regional Development V. Room No. 708, 7 Th Floor, Authority (Mmrda), Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Bandra Kurla Complex, Hospital Building, Bandra (East), Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 051. Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS as per the provisions of section 194C. We rely on the recent decision of the Hon. Gujarat High court in the case of Essar Oil Ltd. V. ITO-262 ITR 63(Guj).” The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O. vide appellate orders dated 16.07.2014 in second round of litigation by observing as under:- “I have considered

MUMBAI ,METROPLITAN RIGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MMRDA),MUMBAI vs. ITO TDS 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6029/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/ Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6030/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ The Income Tax Officer Regional Development (Tds) – 2(2), V. Authority (Mmrda), Room No. 707, 7 Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Smt. K.G. Mittal Bandra (East), Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai – 400 051. Building, Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5950/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Mumbai Metropolitan बनाम/ – 2(3), Regional Development V. Room No. 708, 7 Th Floor, Authority (Mmrda), Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Bandra Kurla Complex, Hospital Building, Bandra (East), Charni Road (W), Mumbai – 400 051. Mumbai – 400 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaatm7106R/Tds No. Mumm16747D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS as per the provisions of section 194C. We rely on the recent decision of the Hon. Gujarat High court in the case of Essar Oil Ltd. V. ITO-262 ITR 63(Guj).” The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O. vide appellate orders dated 16.07.2014 in second round of litigation by observing as under:- “I have considered

AUTOMATIC IT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2018-19

TDS as per section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, by the Assessee. As per Form 3CD the total amount recommended by the auditor for disallowance u/s para 21(b)(B)(ii)(A) is Rs.1,71,78,470/-. The same has been certified in the audit report for the year under consideration. The Form 26A

SAFE AND SURE MARINE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS), WARD 8(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for partly allowed for 7

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2013-14

26A may be submitted post-facto for benefit . benefit . 2. TDS Not Deducted on Capitalized Expenses TDS Not Deducted on Capitalized Expenses- Not Liable That Not Liable That the expenses on which TDS was alleged not deducted were the expenses on which TDS was alleged not deducted were the expenses on which TDS was alleged not deducted were capitalized

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

TDS amounting to Rs.1,35,000/- under section 201(1) of the Act, along with interest of Rs.1,02,600/- under section 201(1A) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) ITA Nos. 8284,8285,8286 & 8287/MUM/2025 (Assessment Years

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

TDS amounting to Rs.1,35,000/- under section 201(1) of the Act, along with interest of Rs.1,02,600/- under section 201(1A) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) ITA Nos. 8284,8285,8286 & 8287/MUM/2025 (Assessment Years

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

TDS amounting to Rs.1,35,000/- under section 201(1) of the Act, along with interest of Rs.1,02,600/- under section 201(1A) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) ITA Nos. 8284,8285,8286 & 8287/MUM/2025 (Assessment Years