SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

section 201(1A) after filing the TDS returns is bad as well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH. SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

CHATE TUTORIALS PVT. LTD. ,AURANGABAD vs. LD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, NASHIK , NASHIK

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

SHRI BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, CPC TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the\nrespective assessee's in ITA Nos

4) to section 234E also makes it clear that the above provision would\nbe effective from 1-7-2012. Therefore, the submission that section 234E\nwould not be operable/effective unless and until section 200A(1)(c)\nwas introduced overlooks the fact that section 234E(1) is the\nsubstantive provision and section 234E(3) provides for a self\ndeclaration/payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

4. .......... The expenses must stand to the test of commercial expediency. The test of commercial expediency cannot be reduced in the shape of a ritualistic formula, nor can it be put in a water-tight compartment so as to be confined in a straitjacket formula. All that law requires is that the expenditure should not be in the nature

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Section\n143(1) of the Act.”\n12. We further find that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court\nhas decided the above referred questions of law holding as\nunder:-\n“10 In our view, the Tribunal has entirely misread the law as\nlaid down in Magneti Marelli (Supra). It is correct that in that\ncase also Assessee had paid royalty

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Section\n143(1) of the Act.”\n\n12. We further find that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court\nhas decided the above referred questions of law holding as\nunder:-\n\n“10 In our view, the Tribunal has entirely misread the law as\nlaid down in Magneti Marelli (Supra). It is correct that in that\ncase also Assessee had paid royalty