2014 (8) TMI 807 - ITAT MUMBAI
DCIT 25(3), 308, C-11, Mumbai Versus Shri Rajeev G. Kalathil
Non-genuine purchases Documentary evidences ignored Supplier declared as hawala dealer Held that - AO had made the addition as one of the suppliers was declared a hawala dealer by the VAT Department - it was a good starting point for making further investigation and take it to logical end - he left the job at initial point itself - Suspicion of highest degree cannot take place of evidence - He could have called for the details of the bank account.....
2014 (9) TMI 520 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
M/s. D. Ramakotaiah & Co. Versus Assistant commissioner of Income Tax
TDS Credit - treatment of TDS as income - relevant assessment year - Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee is not entitled to the credit of tax deducted at source on the amounts paid on sub- contract works Held that - At the time when the amounts were deducted by the principal while making payments to the subcontractors, the amounts were deducted at 2 towards TDS u/s 194C of the Act giving effect to the orders of the Tribunal.....
2015 (3) TMI 221 - ITAT MUMBAI
LSG Sky Chef (India) (P.) Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Short credit of the tax deducted at source - Held that - Though Form 26AS (r/w r.31AB and ss. 203AA and 206C(5)) represents a part of a wholesome procedure designed by the Revenue for accounting of TDS (and TCS), the burden of proving as to why the said Form (Statement) does not reflect the details of the entire tax deducted at source for and on behalf of a deductee cannot be placed on an assessee-deductee. The assessee, by furnishing the TDS cer.....
2012 (6) TMI 328 - ITAT DELHI
Pizza Hut International LLC C/o Dinesh Mehta & Co. Versus Deputy Director of Income-tax, Circle 2(1), International Taxation
DTAA between India and USA - Royalty income - taxability on gross basis or net basis - assessee opted for the provision contained under article 12 of DTAA contemplating taxation 15 of the gross amounts of royalties - Held that - Term Gross amounts has not been defined in the treaty. In common parlance, these words mean the amount received alongwith tax deducted etc. at source. Also, section 198, provides that all sums deducted in accordance with .....
2011 (3) TMI 202 - ITAT MUMBAI
Karan Johar Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 31, Mumbai
Disallowance - It was in the knowledge of the assessee that they have to bear the withholding tax liability even though Tata Elxsi has appointed DLF, a non resident concern for executing the work - it is clear that what is being paid by the Indian resident payer, be it TATA Elxsi or the assessee when they reimburse TATA Elxsi, is only the income of the Non Resident payable as tax to the India Government - Held that - Whenever Payer bears the with.....
2010 (12) TMI 334 - ITAT, CHENNAI
ITO Versus Shri Anupallavi Finance & Investments
Non recognition of TDS as Income - Accrual basis of account - Claim of credit of TDS - Where tax has been deducted at source and paid to the Central Government and income is assessable over a number of years, credit for tax deducted at source shall be allowed across those years in the same proportion in which the income is assessable to tax - Held that - where the course yielded by plain common sense matches with that statutorily provided, i.e., .....
2010 (8) TMI 756 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Income-tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Ahmedabad Versus Hans Road Carriers (P.) Ltd.
Deduction of tax at source - Tax deducted is income received
2009 (2) TMI 243 - ITAT DELHI-G
Satoru Tanaka. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax.
Refund Of Excess TDS By Employer
2008 (4) TMI 141 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
AMICHAND INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (ASSTT.)
Book Profit - AO contend that T.D.S. on dividend had wrongly been excluded while showing the income from dividend - Accounting Standard come w.e.f. 1.4.95 - Therefore, the said Accounting Standard cannot have any role to play in interpreting the provisions of the Act of the. F.Y. ended on 31.3.88 - in view of non-obstante clause of sec. 115J, reference can t be taken to other provisions also - book profit u/s 115J is not required to be increased by T.D.S. assessee s appeal allowed
2006 (7) TMI 107 - DELHI HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus ADIDAS INDIA MARKETING
In case deductor fails to deduct tax at source, the deductee only would be liable to pay income tax on the amount received by him as income Hence revenue is not justified to seek to levy interest for any period after the date on which the tax is actually paid
2005 (9) TMI 226 - ITAT BOMBAY-F
Smt. Varsha G. Salunke. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income-tax, Circle 31 (1).
Deduction Of Tax At Source
2004 (6) TMI 289 - ITAT HYDERABAD-B
Stallion Securities Ltd. Versus Income-Tax Officer.
Deduction Of Tax At Source
1994 (4) TMI 67 - BOMBAY High Court
Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Ambalal Kilachand
Tax Deducted At Source, Total Income
1990 (1) TMI 123 - ITAT GAUHATI
Daljit Family Trust. Versus Income-Tax Officer.
Tax At Source, Tax Deducted
1988 (8) TMI 119 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A
WADI HOLDINGS LTD. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER.
......y the net dividend income was taxable in the hands of the assessee. 18. Respectfully following the said decisions of the Hon ble High Courts we hold that only the net dividend income received by the assessee should be brought to tax. The ITO is therefore, directed to modify the assessment accordingly. 19. In the result both the appeals are allowed.