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 statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant for our purpose and same for ready reference is reproduced and it reads as under: "Penalty for failure to furnish statements, etc. 271H. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, [the Assessing Officer may direct that a person

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 statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant for our purpose and same for ready reference is reproduced and it reads as under: "Penalty for failure to furnish statements, etc. 271H. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, [the Assessing Officer may direct that a person

LATE SHRI 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 statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant for our purpose and same for ready reference is reproduced and it reads as under: "Penalty for failure to furnish statements, etc. 271H. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, [the Assessing Officer may direct that a person

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

69\ntaxmann.com 422 (Mumbai), wherein it was held that\n\"Where a holding company provided bank guarantees for\nbenefit of assessee, its reimbursement by assessee would\nnot come under purview of interest so as to make assessee\nliable to TDS under Section

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

69\n27\ntaxmann.com 422 (Mumbai), wherein it was held that\n\"Where a holding company provided bank guarantees for\nbenefit of assessee, its reimbursement by assessee would\nnot come under purview of interest so as to make assessee\nliable to TDS under Section

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 are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

69 M/s. K D LITE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED taxmann.com 422 (Mumbai), wherein it was held that “Where a holding company provided bank guarantees for benefit of assessee, its reimbursement by assessee would not come under purview of interest so as to make assessee liable to TDS under Section

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 are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

69 M/s. K D LITE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED taxmann.com 422 (Mumbai), wherein it was held that “Where a holding company provided bank guarantees for benefit of assessee, its reimbursement by assessee would not come under purview of interest so as to make assessee liable to TDS under Section

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 statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant for our purpose and same for ready reference is reproduced and it reads as under: "Penalty for failure to furnish statements, etc. 271H. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, [the Assessing Officer may direct that a person

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

69\ntaxmann.com 422 (Mumbai), wherein it was held that\n\"Where a holding company provided bank guarantees for\nbenefit of assessee, its reimbursement by assessee would\nnot come under purview of interest so as to make assessee\nliable to TDS under Section

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 statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant for our purpose and same for ready reference is reproduced and it reads as under: "Penalty for failure to furnish statements, etc. 271H. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, [the Assessing Officer may direct that a person

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed and AO is directed to give benefit on whole deposit of Rs

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal- A.Y.2007-08 - A.Y.2008-09 - A.Y.2009-10 - A.Y.2010-11 - A.Y.2011-12 - A.Y.2012-13

TDS details, return of income copies, address etc. produced by the assessee. 3. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- on the basis of the remand report from Ld. Assessing Officer which deviates from the principle of Natural Justice Mrs. JYOTI AJIT

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE NSURANACE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

TDS under the provisions of section194J of the Act and finally treated the assessee in default under the provisions of section 201(1) of the Act and raised the demand accordingly. The ld CIT(A) after having examined and perused agreements with the service providers and after going into the various services provided reached a conclusion that the outsourced services

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

TDS under the provisions of section194J of the Act and finally treated the assessee in default under the provisions of section 201(1) of the Act and raised the demand accordingly. The ld CIT(A) after having examined and perused agreements with the service providers and after going into the various services provided reached a conclusion that the outsourced services

DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

TDS under the provisions of section194J of the Act and finally treated the assessee in default under the provisions of section 201(1) of the Act and raised the demand accordingly. The ld CIT(A) after having examined and perused agreements with the service providers and after going into the various services provided reached a conclusion that the outsourced services

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

TDS details, return of income copies, address etc. produced by the\nassessee.\n3. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- on the basis of the remand report from Ld.\nAssessing Officer which deviates from the principle of Natural Justice\n4. On facts

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

TDS details, return of income copies, address etc. produced by the\nassessee.\n3. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- on the basis of the remand report from Ld.\nAssessing Officer which deviates from the principle of Natural Justice\n4. On facts

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

TDS details, return of income copies, address etc. produced by the\nassessee.\n3. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- on the basis of the remand report from Ld.\nAssessing Officer which deviates from the principle of Natural Justice\n4. On facts

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act or 40(b) or 40A(3) of the Act. 28. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during