IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO SPICE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE- 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Is Interconnected With Ground No.Ii. Hence, They Are Taken Up Together For Disposal.

depreciation of Rs.234,59,26,810/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to submit details of commission and discount given to dealers and tax deducted on the same. On perusal of the details furnished by the assessee, the ld. AO observed that assessee had deducted tax at source for the commission payments made

BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

section 194H only\ncovers payments made to a person acting on behalf of the payer;\n22. In observing that the discount provided to dealers is not as per\nan obligation under any contract, thereby not appreciating the fact\nthat the appellant has a discount policy in place which is\ncommunicated to the dealers well in advance, and that the\nappellant

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

194H of the Act and hence there cannot be any obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source thereon and consequentially there cannot be any disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, the Ground No. II raised by the assessee is allowed. The Ground No. I raised by the assessee is only supporting

DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

194H of the Act and hence there cannot be any obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source thereon and consequentially there cannot be any disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, the Ground No. II raised by the assessee is allowed. The Ground No. I raised by the assessee is only supporting

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE INDIA LTD. WHICH STANDS MERGED WITH IDEA CELLULAR LTD. AND CONSEQUENTLY KNOWN AS IDEA LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE- 5 (3)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

section 194H of the Act are not applicable on the discount of extended to distributors of pre-paid services. 2.3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned DRP/AO have erred in concluding that the relationship between the Appellant and its distributors is that of a "Principal and Agent' 2.4. On the facts

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

194H of the Act from the upfront discount offered to Pre-paid Distributors, and consequently, no disallowance could be made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct tax at source. 5.7. The above decision of the Tribunal was followed by the Tribunal while deciding identical issue in favour of the Appellant in appeal preferred

DY CIT - 8(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, ground No. 3 of the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Aig General Income Tax-8(3)(1), Insurance Co. Ltd. 15Th Floor, Tower A, Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 615, Peninsula Corporate Park, Vs. M.K. Road, G.K. Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- Lower Parel, 400 020 Mumbai-400 013 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct3518Q Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Damor, Cit Dr Respondent By : S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Madhur Agrawal, Ars’ Date Of Hearing: 23.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.03.2022

Section 194H applies or not based on the various arguments raised before him by the assessee as well as the arguments raised by the assessee before the coordinate bench in earlier years as per para number 30 of that order. Accordingly, Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd.; AY 15-16 ground no. 2 of the appeal of the Assessing Officer

DCIT 8(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA TELESERVICES (MAH) LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit, 8(3)(1) Vs. M/S Tata Teleservices Room No. 615, 6Th Floor (Mah.) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, D-26, Ttc Industrial Mk Road, Mumbai Estate, Midc 400020. Sanpada, Navi Mumbai – 4000703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1458C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Vinay Sinha.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Hiten Chande.Ar Date Of Hearing 04.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

section 40(a)(ia) of Income Tax Tata Teleservices (Mah.) Ltd., Mumbai. Act, 1961 and holding that the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source u/s 194H 'in respect of payment of the discounts allowed to its prepaid distributors on sale of starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers." 2. "On the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT 9(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. CREDILA FINANCIAL SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1491/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit 9(2)(2) Credila Financial Services R.No. 665A, 6 T H Floor, Private Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, B-301 Citi Point, V. Mumbai-400020 Next To Kohinoor Continental Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri(E), Mumbai 400056 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaccc8789P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

Section 79 of the 1961 Act has no application to the assessee. It was submitted that the said loss was not claimed in the return of income filed with the Revenue but since it is purely a legal ground which does not requires investigation into new facts and the facts as are emanating from the orders of the authorities below

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE DIGILINK LTD WHICH MERGED WITH VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Vodafone Income Tax, Circle 26(2), Digilink Ltd Which Stands Vs. New Delhi Amalgamated With Vodafone Mobile (Jurisdiction Realigned From Service Limited) Circle 17(1), New Delhi) C-48, Phase-Ii, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi- 110020. Pan No. Aaaca 3202 D Appellant Respondent

section 194H of the Act on the discount extended by the Appellant to its distributors of prepaid SIM cards/talktime. 1.3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not holding that no disallowance can be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act since the Appellant

ACIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHCIL SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, ground raised by assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negiacit-4(2)(1) Vs. M/S Shcil Services Ltd. Room No.642, 6Th Floor 12/14 Uti Building Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Bank Street, Cross Line Mumbai-400 020 Near Old Custom House Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs5661H Appellant) .. Respondent) & M/S Shcil Services Ltd. Vs. Dcit-4(2)(1) C/O Kalyaniwalla&Mistry Llp Room No.669, 6Th Floor Army & Navy Building Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 3Rd Floor, 148, M.G.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs5661H Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Nitesh Joshi Revenue By T.Kipgen

section 194H and he submitted that the transactions with holding company false under section194H of the I.T. Act. Accordingly, he made disallowance of Rs. 14,98,66,431/- as assessee has not deducted TDS on such payments and the above amount is added back to the total income of the assesse. BAD DEBTS:- 5. The AO observed that assessee

SHCIL SERVICE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, ground raised by assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negiacit-4(2)(1) Vs. M/S Shcil Services Ltd. Room No.642, 6Th Floor 12/14 Uti Building Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Bank Street, Cross Line Mumbai-400 020 Near Old Custom House Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs5661H Appellant) .. Respondent) & M/S Shcil Services Ltd. Vs. Dcit-4(2)(1) C/O Kalyaniwalla&Mistry Llp Room No.669, 6Th Floor Army & Navy Building Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 3Rd Floor, 148, M.G.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs5661H Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Nitesh Joshi Revenue By T.Kipgen

section 194H and he submitted that the transactions with holding company false under section194H of the I.T. Act. Accordingly, he made disallowance of Rs. 14,98,66,431/- as assessee has not deducted TDS on such payments and the above amount is added back to the total income of the assesse. BAD DEBTS:- 5. The AO observed that assessee

DY CIT 9 (1)(2), MUMBAI vs. SABMILLER INDIA LTD (NOW KNOWN AS ANHEUSER BUSCH INBEV INDIA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

depreciation on capital expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Disallowance of grossed up expenses to the extent of taxes withheld therein – 4,97,36,399 10. erred in disallowing an amount of 4,97,36,399 being tax deducted on payments made after grossing up as per Section 195A of the Act; 11. erred

ASIAN PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI

depreciation, trip scheme, waiver of royalty, CSR expenses, and sundry balances written off.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": ["14A", "143(2)", "142(1)", "143(3)", "144C(3)", "8D", "10", "35(2AB)", "154", "92CA", "92B", "40(a)(ia)", "194H

DCIT 8 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA TELESERVICES (MAH.) LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2012-2013

section 40(a)(ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961 and holding that the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source u/s 194H in respect of payment of the discount allowed to its prepaid distributors on sale of starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers. Assessment Years: 2012-13 and 2013-14 2. On the facts and circumstances

CHEMOX EXPORTS IMPORTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

depreciation allowance or any other, allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2018-19\nand I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from service of this notice, a return in the\nprescribed form of the Assessment Year 2018-19.\n3.\nThis notice is being issued after obtaining the prior approval of the PCIT, Mumbai-1 accorded\non date

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

194H", "Section 5(1)", "Package Scheme of Incentives, 2007", "Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd." ], "issues": "The main issues involved disallowances under Section 14A, transfer pricing adjustments related to support services and letters of comfort, disallowance of damaged stock, allowability of R&D expenditure, additional depreciation

MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 2(2)2, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Sa No.462/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1449/Mum/2016) (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Sa No.461/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7382/Mum/2017) (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 194H of the Act warranting deduction of tax at source, for which there would be disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act was made in the assessment. We find that this issue has already been decided in favour of the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 by this Tribunal and against that order, the revenue had preferred an appeal before