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

70, MIDC, Chikloli Kalyan (W), 421301 Area, Ambernath (W), 421501 PAN – AAACA5091N Appellant Respondent M/s. Disha Distributors Assessing Officer, TDS Ward B-208, Pratik Indl. Estate Vs. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road Mulund (W), Mumbai 400078 Kalyan (W), 421301 PAN – ADQPB6130P Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Kapil D. Talreja & Ms. Hema Bhanushali Respondent by: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing

ISHARES MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES EMERGING MARKETS INDEX MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

sections 45 to 55A of the Act whilst sections 111A and 115AD only\nprovide for determination of tax in certain cases and therefore, gains arising\non transactions subjected to STT and those not subjected to STT are no\ndifferent and satisfy the 'similar computation' condition specified in section\n70(2) of the Act;\n4. failed to appreciate that since section

ISHARES CORE MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE EMERGING MARKETS MAURITIUS COMPANY ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TP) 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

70,231 as against TDS credit claimed in the return of income amounting to Rs. 1,49,05,83,737; Ground of Appeal No. 18: Levy of interest under section

ISHARES CORE MSCI TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARE CORE TAOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK MAURITIUS COMPANY ),MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

70,231 as against TDS credit claimed in the return of income amounting to Rs. 1,49,05,83,737; Ground of Appeal No. 18: Levy of interest under section

SCHWAB EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n2. The issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term capital loss, which

ISHARES CORE MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n2.\nThe issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term capital loss, which

ISHARES MSCI INDIA ETF(AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA INDEX MARUITIUS COMPANY),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n2. The issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term capital loss, which

ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN ETF(AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN MAURITIUS CO),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

sections 45 to 55A of the Act whilst sections 111A and 115AD only\nprovide for determination of tax in certain cases and therefore, gains arising\non transactions subjected to STT and those not subjected to STT are no\ndifferent and satisfy the 'similar computation' condition specified in section\n70(2) of the Act;\n4. failed to appreciate that since section

ISHARES CORE MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE EMERGING MARKETS MAURITIUS COMPANY),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

sections 45 to 55A of the Act whilst sections 111A and 115AD only\nprovide for determination of tax in certain cases and therefore, gains arising\non transactions subjected to STT and those not subjected to STT are no\ndifferent and satisfy the 'similar computation' condition specified in section\n70(2) of the Act;\n4. failed to appreciate that since section

ISHARES INDIA 50 ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n2.\nThe issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term capital loss, which

ISHARES CORE MSCI TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n2. The issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term capital loss, which

ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD DIST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

sections 45 to 55A of the Act whilst sections 111A and 115AD only\nprovide for determination of tax in certain cases and therefore, gains arising\non transactions subjected to STT and those not subjected to STT are no\ndifferent and satisfy the 'similar computation' condition specified in section\n70(2) of the Act;\n4. failed to appreciate that since section

ISHARES MSCI INDIA UCITS ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

TDS credit to Rs.236,926.\n\nInitiation of penal proceedings under section 270A of the Act\n\n9. erred in initiating penalty under section 270A of the Act alleging\nmisreporting of income by the Appellant.\"\n\n2. The issue arising in grounds no.1 to 4, raised in assessee's appeal,\npertains to the manner of set off of short-term

NAVIN VINODKUMAR AGARWAL,THANE vs. DCIT 14(1)(2), AAYAKAR ABHAVAN MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), seeking credit of the TDS of Rs.48,70

FLORIDA RETIREMENT SYSTEM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS return. However, they have confirmed that dividends were paid to 16 Florida Retirement System BNYM (i e . DR agent) and a appropriate taxes were withheld by them STATE BANK BNY 644 70 47.366 5,172 SBI is 134-140 OF INDIA M willing to transfer however they have requested to route all communicat ions through BNYM TOTAL

ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN ETF,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

TDS credit amounting to Rs. 1,49,02,70,231 as against\nTDS credit claimed in the return of income amounting to Rs. 1,49,05,83,737;\nGround of Appeal No. 18: Levy of interest under section

ACIT 14 (1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHRIRAM CHITS MAHARASTRA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18

70,248/-. Interest on TDS is not an allowable is not an allowable expenditure. In this case the assessee itself expenditure. In this case the assessee itself agre agreed for the assessment before the AO and this fact is not assessment before the AO and this fact is not disputed by the ld. disputed

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, 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