Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) empowers deduction of tax at source wherever it is so deductible under the provisions of the Act. The effect of the aforesaid charging provision is that, if the statute imposes tax and provides for deducting tax at source through its provisions, the same has to be done, peremptorily. 22. Section 14 of the Act deals with Heads of Income

The Commissioner of Income Tax -1 vs. Harmahendar Singh Bagga

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) empowers deduction of tax at source wherever it is so deductible under the provisions of the Act. The effect of the aforesaid charging provision is that, if the statute imposes tax and provides for deducting tax at source through its provisions, the same has to be done, peremptorily. 22. Section 14 of the Act deals with Heads of Income

Commissioner of Income TAx-II, Hyderabad vs. M/s. Sri Balaji Bio MAss Power Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) empowers deduction of tax at source wherever it is so deductible under the provisions of the Act. The effect of the aforesaid charging provision is that, if the statute imposes tax and provides for deducting tax at source through its provisions, the same has to be done, peremptorily. 22. Section 14 of the Act deals with Heads of Income

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. The Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) empowers deduction of tax at source wherever it is so deductible under the provisions of the Act. The effect of the aforesaid charging provision is that, if the statute imposes tax and provides for deducting tax at source through its provisions, the same has to be done, peremptorily. 22. Section 14 of the Act deals with Heads of Income

Allam Bali Reddy, vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax,

Appeals stand disposed of in terms of

TDS CIRCLE – 18(2), NO.59, HMT BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S TTK HEALTHCARE TPA PVT. LTD., NO.2, H.B.COMPLEX, 2 100 FEET BTM RING ROAD, BTM 1ST STAGE, BTM LAYOUT, BANGALORE – 560 068. ... RESPONDENT (BY SMT.MANASA ANANTHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR) ---- THIS I.T.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV vs. M/S. PRABHATH AGRI BIO TECH P. LTD.,

The appeals stand dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17(1) and 17(2

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 194-J of the Act? 2. Whether the Tribunal committed an error in not recording a finding regarding application of other provisions of TDS

M/s.V.R.Farms Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TDS amount. It was further contended that by virtue of section 115JAA(4) the assessee is entitled to set off MAT credit at the stage at which the tax has become payable. Consequently, it was submitted, that the assessee is entitled to take into account the tax credit (MAT credit) available to it under section 115JAA when it computes

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, vs. M/s. Celestial Laboratories Limited,

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (TDS), 4TH FLOOR, NO.59, HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560032. ... RESPONDENTS (BY Mr. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION

DIRECTOR OF INCOMD TAX [INTERNATIONAL TAXATION] HYDERABAD vs. M/S M W ZANDER [S] PTE LIMITED-INDIA BR, HYDERABAD

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TDS) CIRCLE-16(2) NO.59, HMT BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.DILIP, ADV. AND SRI.K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: THE KARNATAKA STATE APEX CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VYALIKAVAL BRANCH BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT 2 THIS ITA FILED UNDER SECTION

Commissioner of Income Tax-(TDS), vs. M/s.Neeladri Chit Funds Private Ltd.,

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS) CIRCLE-16(2) NO.59, HMT BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.DILIP, ADV. AND SRI.K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: THE KARNATAKA STATE APEX CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., GANDHINAGAR BRANCH BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT 2 THIS ITA FILED UNDER SECTION

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. PATNI TELECOM SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TDS) CIRCLE-16(2) NO.59, HMT BHAVAN, 4TH FLOOR BELLARY ROAD, GANGANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.DILIP, ADV. AND SRI.K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: THE KARNATAKA STATE APEX CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ASHOKA PILLAR BRANCH BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT 2 THIS ITA FILED UNDER SECTION

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Hyderabad. vs. Biological - E Ltd.,

In the result, the appeal is partly

TDS CIRCLE 18(2), NO.59, HMT BHAVAN 4TH FLOOR BELLARY ROAD GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE 560 032. ... APPELLANTS (BY Mr. K V ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. TTK HEALTHCARE TPA PVT. LTD., NO 2, H B COMPLEX 100 FEET BTM RING ROAD BTM I STAGE, BTM LAYOUT BANGALORE 560068. ... RESPONDENT (BY Mr. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION

Commissioner of Income Tax II vs. Sri G.K.Kabra,

In the result, the appeal is partly

TDS CIRCLE- 18(2), BANGALORE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section

PENDURTHI CHANDRASEKHAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

The appeal is allowed and all the four substantial

Section 56 of the Act? 2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the conclusion of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that undisclosed income has been brought in the form of gifts in spite of the fact that there

Commissioner of Income tax-V, vs. M/s. INTRACK INC,

2 to clause (vi) of sub- section (1) of section 9; By Finance Act, 2010, the said provision is substituted by the following: Substituted by the Finance Act, 2010, w.e.f. 01.04.2010. Prior to its substitution, proviso as substituted by the Finance Act, 2008, w.r.e.f. 01.04.2005, read as under: 12 “Provided that where in respect of any such

Mr. Vasamsetty Veera Venkata Satyanarayana vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

TDS”) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act of 1961”) dated 22.03.2024, was set aside in the appeal preferred by the assessee. 2

M/s Modi Builders AND Realtors (P) Ltd., vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income tax,

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

2), inter alia, provides that where a refund is due to the assessee, "in pursuance of an order referred to in Section 240" and the Assessing Officer does not grant the refund within the stipulated time, the Central Government is required to pay simple interest at the stipulated rate. Section 240 deals with refund on appeal, etc. This provision clearly