DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., (FORMERLY: BAJAJ AUTO FINANCE LTD.,),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objections of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.356/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

194C to 194J so as to raise TDS demand again under section 201 and levy of interest under section 201(1A). Therefore, assessee‟s ground on this issue are to be allowed as the entire amount has been disallowed under the provisions of section 40(a)(i)/(ia) in the computation of income on the reason that TDS

YASHWANT DADASAHEB BANDIGARE,,KOLHAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX : 2,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1721/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

TDS as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act. It is an admitted fact that provisions of sub-section (7) of section 194C of the Act deals with furnishing of PAN particulars to the income-tax authorities and the same were not complied with by the assessee. In our view, the reason given

SHABBIR HASHAM SAYYED,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.947/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shabbir Hasham Sayyed, New Ashiyana Enterprises, S.No.75/2, Room No.153, Sayyed Nagar, Hadapsar, Pune-411028. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Achps9564L बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-14(2), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Mrs. Shabana Parveen सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-7, Pune Dated 08.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Making A Disallowance Of Rs. 66,84,217/- By Invoking Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Without Realizing The Fact That Appellant Is An Individual & This Was The First Year Of Applicability Of Provisions Of Section 44Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Therefore For A.Y. 2012 - 2013 No Tax Was Deductible Under Chapter Xvii B & Therefore Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Do Not Have Any Application In The Appellant’S Case.

TDS was not done as per the Rules. In view of the said default, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and made the entire payments as addition. 3 5. The assessee argued before the CIT(A) stating that the said provisions of section

HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

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." 8 ITA.No.394/PUN/2025 (Hemant Enterprises) 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source, the same cannot

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

194C of the Act. It was further pointed out that even the provisions of section 194-I of the Act were not attracted as the fees were not in the nature of rent. Hence, no tax was required to be deducted from these payments. The contention of assessee was found to be not correct by the Assessing Officer

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

194C of the Act. It was further pointed out that even the provisions of section 194-I of the Act were not attracted as the fees were not in the nature of rent. Hence, no tax was required to be deducted from these payments. The contention of assessee was found to be not correct by the Assessing Officer

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1),, PUNE vs. SHRADDHA & PRASAD JOINT VENTURE,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2665/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Pune. .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

Section 194C were not applicable for the purpose of TDS, without appreciating the fact that the work contract order was issued in the name of the assessee (JV) and re-allocation of the contract between the members of the JV would amount to sub-contracting. 3

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -6 (3), PUNE vs. SUBHASH AND B.T. PATIL & SONS AND N.V. KHAROTE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm

194C were not applicable for the purpose of TDS. The two corporate entities forming joint venture were already being assessed since A.Y. 2000-01 onwards on their respective shares and TDS apportionment certificates were also issued by the Assessing Officer every year for these eight years including the current assessment year to enable them to claim the same in their

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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, the same cannot be levied once again

M/S. ORGANICA,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK -1, NASHIK

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmashali

TDS on the balance amount of payments and nothing is on record to show that Ld. AO had made verification as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act. Accordingly the assessment order dated 11.09.2017 framed u/s 143(3

ASHOK SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.763/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 वष"

TDS. Otherwise, the assessee applied the provisions of section 194C of the Act. 3. During the First Appellate proceedings, CIT(A) dismissed

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. SHRADDHA & IHP JV WANGANA PROJECT,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

194C were not applicable for the purpose of TDS. The two corporate entities forming joint venture were already being assessed since A.Y. 2000-01 onwards on their respective shares and TDS apportionment certificates were also issued by the Assessing Officer every year for these eight years including the current assessment year to enable them to claim the same in their

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. SHRADDHA & PRASAD JV KHURA VARODA,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

194C were not applicable for the purpose of TDS. The two corporate entities forming joint venture were already being assessed since A.Y. 2000-01 onwards on their respective shares and TDS apportionment certificates were also issued by the Assessing Officer every year for these eight years including the current assessment year to enable them to claim the same in their

M/S. B. M. CHAPALKAR & SONS,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2906/Pun/2016 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons, 26, Dehbanoo Complex, Nashik Pune Road, Nashik Road, Nashik-422 101, Pan: Aadfb5084C .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

3(1) of Section 139. This section 40(a)(ia) of the Act refers only to the duty to deduct tax and pay to government account. If there is any shortfall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payments falling under various TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3),, PUNE vs. SUBHASH & B.T. PATIL & SONS & N.V.KHAROTE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

194C of the Act. (e) The assessee had failed to deduct tax from the payments made to its members the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would apply. 6. the A.O further held that the assessee had claimed TDS of Rs. 59,58,556/- in its return of income on total contract receipts, however no income

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that the above claims and allowances be allowed.” 5. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of newspapers publication

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that the above claims and allowances be allowed.” 5. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of newspapers publication

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that the above claims and allowances be allowed.” 5. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of newspapers publication

M/S. TAO PUBLISHING PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1140/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08

section 194C of the Act which only mandates for effecting TDS as per the contract norm. Considering clear mentioning of the non requirement of effecting TDS, we are of the opinion that this is a case of reimbursement by Company to M/s. Imperial Packers. This fact was not appreciated by the CIT(A) at the time of deciding the issue