COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. CENTURY BUILDING INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD

TDS on the interests paid by the assessee to the creditors. The first question which arises for determination in these civil appeals is : whether it is open to the directors of the assessee-company to contend before the A.O., after search and survey operations, that the transactions entered into by the assessee were for namesake and that they actually related

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

TDS, without any reference to chargeability of tax under the Income Tax Act by the concerned non- resident assessee. This section is similar to sections 193 and 194 of the Income Tax Act by which deductions have to be made without any reference to the chargeability of a sum received by a non-resident assessee under the Income

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

45,57,380.79 5.6. Thereafter, the assessees approached the Indian tax authorities by filing applications under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 19619, seeking certification of nil withholding prior to consummation of the transfer. By notices dated 17.08.2018, the tax authorities informed that the assessees would not be eligible to avail the benefits under the DTAA on the ground

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

Section 271C as the respondent in each case has discharged its 45 burden of showing reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source. VI. Directions-cum-Conclusion: 36. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we hold that the TDS

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN

TDS), Kanpur vs. Canara Bank where we have considered and decided those issues by our judgment of this date. After dismissal of the writ petition dated 28.02.2011 the appellant filed a review application which too was dismissed on 04.11.2011. Aggrieved by those two judgments Civil Appeal Nos.792-793 of 2014 have been filed by the appellant. 6. We have heard Shri

M/S K LAKSHMANYA AND COMPANY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

Section 244(A)(1). This question was answered as follows: “5.In the present case, as stated above, there are two components of the tax paid by the assessee for which the assessee was granted refund, namely TDS of Rs. 45

VINUBHAI MOHANLAL DOBARIA vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

45 of 59 60. A perusal of the reproduced portion of Paragraph 8 shows that the expression “first offence” has been defined under the compounding guidelines as any offence committed: a. Prior to the date of issuance of any show cause notice for prosecution in relation to the said offence; or b. Prior to any intimation relating to prosecution