Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) 3RD FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE CENTRALISED PENSION PROCESSING CENTRE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH W.A.No.410/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) 3RD FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE CENTRALISED PENSION PROCESSING CENTRE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH W.A.No.410/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) 3RD FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE CENTRALISED PENSION PROCESSING CENTRE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH W.A.No.410/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) 3RD FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003. 2 STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE CENTRALISED PENSION PROCESSING CENTRE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2021, ALONG WITH W.A.No.410/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME

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

Appeals stand disposed of in terms of

SECTION 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28/02/2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.866/BANG/2012, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO: I. FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW STATED THEREIN, II. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.866/BANG/2012 DATED 28/02/2013 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER

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

5. The short question, therefore, is whether the tax component paid by the employer towards and as income tax, when an employee is entitled to tax free salary, is a perquisite within the meaning of Section 17(2) of the Act. 6. The term “salary” has been defined in Section 17 of the Act so as to include wages

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

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

b) reduction of the amount of relief of tax allowed under section 90 and 90A and deduction from the Indian Income-tax before furnishing the return of income. 38.3 The credit for the above shall also be allowed under section 140A for calculating tax and interest before furnishing the return of income. 38.4 The above amendments will take effect from

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

B. HINCHIGERI AND THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA I. T. A.No.438/2012 C/W I. T. A. Nos.441/2012, 443/2012, 447/2012, 448/2012, 454/2012, 457/2012, 459/2012, 461/2012, 462/2012, 463/2012 & 464/2012 I. T. A.No.438/2012 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income-Tax TDS, HMT Bhavan, Bellary Road, Bangalore 2. The Income-Tax Officer TDS Ward, Aayakar Bhavan, Sedam Road, Gulbarga

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

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

5. In the meanwhile, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by an order dated 22.02.2011 inter alia relying on the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in case of Medi Assist as well as Circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009 upheld the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS). The assessee thereupon approached the Income

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 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.04.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.1421/BANG/2014

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 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.04.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.1418/BANG/2014

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 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 30.04.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.1420/BANG/2014

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS vs. M/S.IDEA CELLULAR LTD

Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: SUJOY PAUL,NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

2), Hyderabad. Between: The Commissioner of lncome Tax-TDS, Hyderabad ...Appellant AND M/s.ldea Cellular Ltd., H.No.5-9-62, KLK Estates, Fateh Maidan Road, Hyderabad ...Respondent |.T.T.A.No. 270 of 2018 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal Under Section 2604 of the lncome Tax Act,'1961 against the Order dated 25.10.2017 passed in ITA No. 1666/HYD/2014 for the Assessment Year

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

5. At the outset, we note that there is no dispute and debate on the initial interest, which is payable and should have been paid by the Revenue when they made the refund of the taxes. The dispute has arisen as the Revenue did not pay along with the refund of taxes, the ITA Nos. 167/2012 & 168/2012 Page

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

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. SOMA ENTERPRISES LTD

The appeal is disposed off accordingly

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

2) was issued and served on the assessee on 23.08.2007. In response to the same, the Internal Auditor has appeared and represented the case and produced various documents and books of account for verification. 4. On the question of depreciation, the Trust had claimed deduction towards depreciation allowance 4 amounting to Rs.8,41,36,636/- which includes depreciation

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market committee,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

TDS. 2. While admitting the matter following questions were framed:- 1. Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that the payment made by the assessee in form of transmission/ wheeling/ SLDC charges were not liable to be deducted at source either under Section 194J or 194C of the Income Tax Act? 2. Whether Tribunal was justified in holding -2- that

Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. C Eswar Reddy AND Co.,

The appeals stand dismissed answering all the

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

5. By the order produced as Annexure-9 in M.A. No. 451 of 2015, the Tribunal found the amount of TDS default for the relevant assessment year to be Rs.1,36,040/- and the Assessing Officer was directed to pass revised order under Section 201 of the Act. Similarly, reckoning the deduction made under Annexure-9 produced