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

TDS as per Section 234E, the fee payable is provided but the mechanism provided was that if there was failure to furnish statements within the prescribed date, the penalty under Section 271H (1) and (2) could be imposed. However, under sub- section (3

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

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

TDS as per Section 234E, the fee payable is provided but the mechanism provided was that if there was failure to furnish statements within the prescribed date, the penalty under Section 271H (1) and (2) could be imposed. However, under sub- section (3

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 as per Section 234E, the fee payable is provided but the mechanism provided was that if there was failure to furnish statements within the prescribed date, the penalty under Section 271H (1) and (2) could be imposed. However, under sub-section (3

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 as per Section 234E, the fee payable is provided but the mechanism provided was that if there was failure to furnish statements within the prescribed date, the penalty under Section 271H (1) and (2) could be imposed. However, under sub- section (3

CAPGEMINI CONSULTING INIDA P.LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS CAPGEMINI INDIA P.LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 8.12.2008 assessing the total income at Rs.52,62,41,478/-. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.3.2010. The assessment already completed vide order dated 8.12.2008 was reopened by recording the following reasons: “The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed

DCIT 10(2), MUMBAI vs. CAPAGEMINI CONSULTING INDIA P. LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS CAPGEMINI INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 8.12.2008 assessing the total income at Rs.52,62,41,478/-. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.3.2010. The assessment already completed vide order dated 8.12.2008 was reopened by recording the following reasons: “The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed

ITO (3) 2(2), MUMBAI vs. R.K. EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 8.12.2008 assessing the total income at Rs.52,62,41,478/-. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 and notice u/s 148 was issued on 31.3.2010. The assessment already completed vide order dated 8.12.2008 was reopened by recording the following reasons: “The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed

DCIT CIR 28(1), NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASHTAVINAYAKA CONSTRUCTION, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

3 / M / 2 0 1 5 18. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us. The undisputed facts are that the assessee is a works contractor and it is a statutory requirement under the VAT Rules to deduct TDS on the said contract for the work carried out under the Sales Tax Act. The assessee

ASHTVINAYAKA CONSTRUCTION,NAVI MUMBAI vs. JCIT CIR 22(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

3 / M / 2 0 1 5 18. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us. The undisputed facts are that the assessee is a works contractor and it is a statutory requirement under the VAT Rules to deduct TDS on the said contract for the work carried out under the Sales Tax Act. The assessee

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED ( BORIVILI BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

TDS u/s 194A not deducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19) defines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under the co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative societies. It is clear that

RELIANCE MONEY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

3 2 5 9 / M u m / 2 0 1 7 provisions of section 115JB of the Act. The assessee revised its return of income on 29.3.2014 declaring the same income under the normal provisions as well as under section 115JB of the Act as the original return with only making higher claim of TDS

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (VAKOLA BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)4, MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (MALAD BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (TURNER ROAD BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED ( KURLA BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED ( MULUND BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)-1(1)(4) , MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (WADALA BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)4, MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (SANTACRUZ BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 1 (1)(4), MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

TDS u/s 194A not\ndeducted on the interest payments are “Housing Societies. Section 2(19)\ndefines “co-operative society” means a co-operative society registered under\nthe co-operative societies Act, 1912(2 of 1912) or under any other law for\nthe time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative\nsocieties. It is clear that