Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS from the salaries of nuns or priests? (v) Whether deduction of tax at source violates Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (vi) Whether the non-deduction of tax at source from the salaries of nuns or priests for more than 76 years confers a right against such deduction? 16. The above questions are considered in seriatim as below

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS from the salaries of nuns or priests? (v) Whether deduction of tax at source violates Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (vi) Whether the non-deduction of tax at source from the salaries of nuns or priests for more than 76 years confers a right against such deduction? 16. The above questions are considered in seriatim as below

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS from the salaries of nuns or priests? (v) Whether deduction of tax at source violates Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (vi) Whether the non-deduction of tax at source from the salaries of nuns or priests for more than 76 years confers a right against such deduction? 16. The above questions are considered in seriatim as below

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS from the salaries of nuns or priests? (v) Whether deduction of tax at source violates Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (vi) Whether the non-deduction of tax at source from the salaries of nuns or priests for more than 76 years confers a right against such deduction? 16. The above questions are considered in seriatim as below

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

vi), no doubt includes monitory benefit under the term “salary” for the purpose of Rule 3 but by specific stipulation excludes the value of perquisites specified in Section 17(2) of the Act. What is included and has been treated as perquisites under Section 17(2) of the Act cannot be added and treated as monetary benefit because of specific

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

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

TDS as prescribed under Section 194J has been upheld by the Bombay as well as Delhi High Court except to the extent of penalty as prescribed under Section 271C. It is also argued that the person referred to in Section 194J and Explanation (a) appended to Section 194J(1) need not himself / herself is to be a Doctor and therefore

M/S.P.SATYANARAYANA AND SONS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1[9], HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

TDS at 20% under Section 195(1) of the Act and also paid the same to Government account. However, according to the assessee, since it is a cost sharing agreement and payments were made by the assesee for reimbursement of cost/expenses, no 16 income is embedded therein. Therefore, the assessee is not liable to deduct tax under Section

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. N. Annapurna

The appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

VI, the Assessee had paid revised tax and interest under Section 201 (1) (a) of the Act. The Assessee stated that it had no intention of concealing any income or TDS. The Assessee stated that it had been advised that salary paid outside India was not liable to tax in India. The Assessee accordingly submitted that it was prevented

Commissioner of Income Tax [TDS] vs. M/s Madhucon sino Hydro.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

TDS certificate purported to be issued by L.I.C. and other documents before the Income Tax Department, Dhanbad by putting signature on the verification portion of the said return and thereby claimed refund of Rs.40,437/- on account of excess deduction of tax at source and repayment of housing loan and others. It was alleged that in course of inquiry from