Section 115WB of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 115WB is CIT v. JDS Apparels (P.) Ltd. (370 ITR 454), cited in 54 of the 56 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115WB

CIT v. JDS Apparels (P.) Ltd.
370 ITR 454 · 2015 · High Court
54
citing judgments

Payments to banks for credit card transaction processing are considered bank charges or fees for services rendered, not commission or brokerage, and therefore are not subject to TDS under Section 194H of the Income Tax Act.

Smith Kline & French (India) Ltd. v. CIT
193 ITR 582 · 1992 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Sales promotion and publicity expenses are considered business expenditures aimed at generating goodwill and facilitating business operations, falling under commercial expediency. These activities are not limited to direct media propaganda but can include indirect approaches to market presence.

CIT v. Dinesh Goyal
331 ITR 16 · Reported
4
citing judgments
DCIT v. Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd.
134 ITD 388 · 2012 · ITAT
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 115WB

Piramal Glass Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6992/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 115WSection 115W(3)Section 154Section 17(2)

Ravi Poddar, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, ground no. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 130/JPR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrawal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Prem Prakash Meena (JCIT)
Section 148Section 2

M/S. M.N. Modes, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1552/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishim.N. Modes, Dcit, C/O. Gk Kedia & Co. Vs. Circle-22(1), 2044/6, Chitra Gupta Road, Chuna Civik Centre, New Delhi Mandi, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi Pan:Aaffm0837L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Sangeeta Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 29Section 40Section 44A

Flowers Valley P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 2(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4804/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Ms.Anu Krishna Agarwal
Section 115W

Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2981/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

Punjab National Bank, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4254/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi vs. Addll. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3869/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

Kanga & Co., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. (11)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7293/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia
Section 115WSection 143(3)

ACIT, Trichy vs. The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 1734/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan, CIT
Section 115Section 115WSection 37(2)

Ttk Helathcare Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1589/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. A.B. Koli, IRS, JCIT
Section 115WSection 139(1)

Esi Software (India)Private Limited

In the result, the appeal

COP/149/2015HC Karnataka04 Dec 2015

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

Section 115WSection 17Section 260Section 260A

DCIT RG 1(2), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 7934/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2015AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 1Section 11Section 115Section 115WSection 2Section 254(1)

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. Oil Natural Gas Corporation Ltd

TAXAP/527/2013HC Gujarat12 Aug 2013
Section 10(14)Section 133Section 17(1)(iv)Section 201Section 201(1)

T & T Motors Ltd

ITA/899/2010HC Delhi24 Jan 2012
Section 115WSection 260A

R & B Falcon (A) Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is allowed to the aforementioned extent

CIVIL APPEAL No. 3326/2008Supreme Court06 May 2008

Bench: Authority Of Advance Ruling (Aar) On The Question Whether Transportation Cost Incurred By The Petitioner In Providing ' ... Transportation Facility For Movement Of Off-Shore .... Employees From Their Residence In Home Country To The Place Of Work ~Nd Back Is Liable To Fringe Benefit Tax As H 804 ,_

Section 115W

R & B Falcon (A) Pty Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeal is allowed to the above extent

C.A. No.-003326-003326 - 2008Supreme Court06 May 2008
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax
Section 115Section 115WSection 245Q(1)