PASHANKAR AUTO WHEELS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. CIT(A) CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

TDS statement – Rent (section 194-I) 4,50,000 2 3. He, therefore, passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 26.03.2022 after

WALVEKAR BROTHERS & CO,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

194, section194A, section 194B, section 194BB, section 194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income” 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source

M/S. BAFNA BUILDERS & LAND DEVELOPERS,,JALGAON vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripotem/S. Bafna Builders & Jcit, Range - 1 Land Developers Jalgaon 425001 "Nayantara", Subhash Chowk Vs. Jalgaon 425001 Pan – Aadfb4627P Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Sunil Ganoo Respondent By: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing: 22.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.04.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A) 2, Nashik Dated 13.01.2015 Passed In Case No. Nsk/Cit(A)-2/4713-14 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short “The Act”.

TDS deduction under Section 194(1)(a) of the Act regarding use of any machinery or plant or equipment; as the case

LOKMANGAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2, SOLAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.522/Pun/2020 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Lokmangal Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 128, Murarji Peth, Near Seva Sadan High School, Solapur – 413 001 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaaal0119J

section 194(1) r.w.s. 40a(ia) disallowance of Rs.3,49,386/- on account of non- deduction of TDS on interest

KIMBERLY CLARK LEVER P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2481/Pun/2012 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Kimberly Clark Lever P. Ltd., Gat No.934 To 937, Village Sanaswadi Off Nagar Road, Ta- Shirur, Pune-412208. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaack4647E बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-Xi(I), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) Of The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Pune (‘The Assessing Officer’ For Short) Dated 29.10.2012 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “The Appellant Objects To The Order Dated 29 October 2012 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 11(1), Pune [‘Acit’ Or ‘Ao’] Following The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’) In Respect Of The Aforesaid Assessment Year On The Following Among Other Grounds:

TDS u/s 194J of the Act and justified the action of the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 22. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. There is no material on record to show that the HUL had provided any services like technical or managerial in nature

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. M SUBU CHEM PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS is not required to deduct as per sub-clause (ia) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194

M/S. SUBU CHEM PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS is not required to deduct as per sub-clause (ia) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194

JITENDRA KAPILDEO GUPTA,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS is not required to deduct as per sub-clause (ia) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. JITENDRA K. GUPTA,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

TDS is not required to deduct as per sub-clause (ia) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

TDS @1% u/s 1941A would also be required to be deducted for extra amenities such as club membership fees, car parking fee, electricity and water facility. maintenance fee or any other charges of similar nature paid at the time of purchase of property which are incidental to transfer of the immovable property. From the above it is clear that there

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT LTD ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

TDS) was cumbersome and involves a lot of paper work and collection from the company would be much easier. (ii) Since there was no tax incidence in the hands of the shareholder that would encourage investment in the shares of domestic companies. Sec.115O so introduced in Chapter XII-D of the Act reads thus: “115-O. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

TDS) Pune in his order u/s. 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act dated 27.03.2018, in para 4, has specifically mentioned that the Department has filed appeal against the order of the Pune Tribunal favoring appellant on identical issue involved in FYs 2006-07 to 2011-12. It is quite clear that the jurisdictional Tribunal had decided the issue