2016 (4) TMI 592 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
M/s Timken India Limited And Others Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax And Others
Validity of Sections 44AC and 206C - Held that - The minor premise of the ratio decidendi was that a distinction had to be made in respect of assessees covered by Section 44AC of the Act between those who would be able to justify the deductions claimed and others who may not stay back for the same or have their books in order for such purpose. - It is the same rule that needs to be applied to Section 44D(b) of the Act in similar circumstances as the rule was applied to Section 44BBA thereof in the case of Royal Jordanian Airlines 2015 (11) TMI 1454 - DELHI HIGH COURT . Nothing regarding the po ....... - .......
2016 (4) TMI 418 - ITAT JAIPUR
Sikar and Jhunjhunu Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) , Jaipur and Vica-Versa
TDS u/s 194H - payment of cess made to RCDF is in the nature of technical and professional service - charging interest U/s 201(1A) - Held that - Payment to RCDF cess, it has not been demonstrated by the Department that any managerial services in this connection have been rendered to assessee by RCDF qua this amount. RCDF is an apex cooperative body and cess is paid to it by virtue of federal structure in Rajasthan cooperative set up. Thus as far as assessee s business is concerned, there is no rendering of any managerial services by RCDF as alleged by the AO u/s 194H and upheld Id. C1T(A) u/s ....... - .......
2016 (4) TMI 244 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
International Steel Corporation Versus Income-tax Officer (TDS) -1, Ahmedabad
Default u/s 206C(6A) - Tax Collection at Source (TCS) - whether ld. CIT(A) was correct in denying the benefit referred in section 206C(1C) for the sales of ₹ 1,57,60,687/- even when assessee has submitted form no.27C from respective buyers - Held that - Assessee has duly obtained form 27C for the sales of ₹ 1,57,60,687/- and there is a list of 24 parties shown in the order of ld. CIT(A) at para 5.3 and out of 24 parties in 19 cases column of date shown in part-I is not filled and in the remaining six cases either there is a minor overwriting in the form or wrong date is mentioned. ....... - .......
2016 (3) TMI 281 - ITAT RAJKOT
Income Tax Officer TDS Ward 3, Jamnagar Versus Dudani Metal Agencies and Vica-Versa
TCS demands - tax liability of the buyer of the scrap - Held that - TDS demands raised under section 201, TCS demands raised under section 206C are in the nature of vicarious liabilities which survive only as long as principal liability of the taxpayer remains in existence. When the principal tax liability itself is extinguished, the very reason of the demand raised under section 206C ceases to hold good in law. The details furnished by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and the verifications by the Assessing Officer are intended to ensure that the buyer of the goods has duly discharged ....... - .......
2016 (3) TMI 859 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax-TDS Circle, Ahmedabad Versus Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd.
Additions made u/s. 206C(6)/206C(7) - non collection of TCS on sale of DOC (de-oiled cake), maize husk and cotton waste nspite of the fact that those items were scrap as defined u/s 206(c) - Held that - To elaborate, perusal of manufacturing process of DOC amply testifies that the entire manufacturing process is designed to obtain two main products which are usable as such, namely, oil and DOC. This DOC which is high in protein content is used as a fertilizer or chicken feed or cattle feed. This DOC also is pass through various other manufacturing stages to suit the customers as is required by ....... - .......
2016 (2) TMI 296 - ITAT KOLKATA
Bansilal Leisure Parks Ltd, Barik & Associates Versus Income Tax Officer (TDS) , Kolkata
Default for noncollection of tax at source as per the provisions of Section 206C(6A) - sale of the timber - Held that - The assessee should not be treated as assessee in default in terms of the amended provisions of the law. From the order of the ld. CIT(A) we find that all the parties to whom the sales were made have furnished their respective returns of income. We also find that the ld. DR has not brought anything contrary to the argument of the ld.AR. Accordingly we also relied on the order of ITAT Ahmeda ....... - .......
2015 (11) TMI 1216 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) Versus M/s. PRIYA BLUE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD
TCS u/s 206C - Not collection of tax at source on Old and used plates, Non-excisable (exempted) like furniture, wood, etc., Trading of scrap (melting) and High seas sale - ITAT held that such products may be commercially known as scrap they are not waste and scrap , as such items are usable as such, and, therefore, do not fall within the definition of scrap as envisaged in the Explanation to section 206C(1) - Held that - The Tribunal, in the impugned order, has recorded that the items/products in question obtained from the activity of ship breaking are usable as such and, therefore, do not fal ....... - .......
2015 (11) TMI 1263 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Income-tax Officer, TDS-4, Ahmedabad Versus M/s. Priya Blue Industries Pvt. Ltd.
TCS u/s 206C - Non compliance of provisions of Section 206C - failure to deduct TDS - CIT(A) deleting order passed u/s. 201(1) and interest thereon u/s. 201(1A) - Held that - Waste and scrap are one item. The waste and Scrap must be from manufacture or mechanical working of material which is definitely not usable as such because of breakage, cutting up, ware and to other reasons. It would mean that these waste and scrap being one item should arise from manufacture or mechanical working of material. The words waste and scrap should have nexus with manufacturing or mechanical working of material ....... - .......
2015 (7) TMI 908 - ITAT BANGALORE
Karnataka Forest Development Corporation Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Tds Ward, Davangere
Default under section 206C(6A) - short collection of tax at source (TCS) - goods for use in manufacturing, processing or producing articles or things. - Held that - Section 206C(1A) mandates that any person responsible for collecting tax under section 206C(1) need not do so if he obtains a declaration from the buyer that he is purchasing the goods for use in manufacturing, processing or producing articles or things. It does not say that such declaration has to be obtained at the very same moment when a sale is affected. A reading of sub section (1B) clearly brings out this since obligation of ....... - .......
2015 (5) TMI 538 - ITAT DELHI
Divisional Forest Officer Versus ITO (TDS)
TCS u/s 206C - sale of forest produce, not being timber or tendu leaves - waiver from collection of TCS - Demand u/s 206C(6) and 206C(7)- Assessee in default for such non-collection of tax at source at the time of sale of the goods - assessee contended that all the buyers had taken into account the purchases made from the assessee for computing income in their respective returns filed u/s 139 after paying tax due thereon - Held that - the liability of the seller to collect tax at source is waived only on the buyer submitting Form no. 27C to him at the time of debiting the account of buyer or t ....... - .......
2015 (1) TMI 707 - KERALA HIGH COURT
EXCEL TIMBERS PVT. LTD. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND INCOME TAX OFFICER [TDS]KOZHIKODE
Applicability of Section 206C r.w.s. 44AC of the Income Tax Act - dealers like the petitioners, who are importing timber from abroad, to effect Tax Collection at Source (TCS); and would the failure, if any, make them an assessee-in-default , to be saddled with the liability to pay tax and also interest as envisaged therein? - Held that - The provision does not draw any distinction between Timber grown in India (whether in forest or elsewhere) and the Timber imported from abroad. The object of the Statute is important to be noted, to ascertain the scope of the provision. Procurement of revenue ....... - .......
2015 (7) TMI 1028 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Hillwood Furniture (P.) Ltd. Versus Income-tax officer
Tax Collection at Source (TCS) u/s 206C - import of timber from abroad - assessee-in-default - circumstances under which ss. 44AC and 206C were brought into the statute book about 2 1/2 decades ago and the subsequent deletion of s. 44AC alone, w.e.f. 1st April, 1992; however retaining s. 206C - Held that - Though timber under specified circumstances was intended to be included under s. 44AC, in the context of fixing presumptive income, it cannot be said that it has lost its significance, on deletion of s. 44AC, as it stands separately covered and dealt with under s. 206C clubbing along with se ....... - .......
2014 (8) TMI 716 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
KPG. Enterprise Versus The Income Tax Officer, TDS-4, Ahmedabad
Assessee in default u/s 201(1) Short collection of TCS amount - Submission of Form No. 27C mandatory requirement or not Applicability of section 206C Consignment dispatches results in stock transfer or not Held that - The assessee is not legally obliged to collect the TCS from a buyer who furnishes a declaration to the assessee to the effect that the purchases made by such buyer are to be utilized for the purposes of manufacturing, processing or producing articles or things or for purposes or generation of power and not for trading purposes - in a case where such a declaration is furnished by ....... - .......
2014 (10) TMI 10 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Divisional Logging Manager Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax
Imposition of penalty u/s 271A(2)(c) delay in furnishing return for Tax Collection at Source (TCS) - whether penalty can be imposed for technical breach, delay in filing of statement in form 27EC Held that - It is the mandatory provision to furnish half yearly return - The returns were furnished on 12.06.1996 - It is not a procedural or technical mistake - The D.D.O. is responsible for furnishing the return, so the contention of the assessee cannot be accepted that it was supposed to be furnished by the Headquarter - It is the pios duty of the D.D.O. to furnish the return - It shows gross negl ....... - .......
2013 (12) TMI 890 - ITAT CUTTACK
Shree Jagannath Temple Managing Committee Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
Leasing the quarrying by the Temple Management Committee - Liable for TCS - Held that - As per decision in Jagannath Temple Managing Committee vs CIT & Others 2007 (10) TMI 173 - ORISSA HIGH COURT - Shree Jagannath Temple Managing Committee has been constituted by the State Government under the provisions of Shree Jagannath Temple Act - As per section 2(31) - From the definition of the word person , it is apparent that an authority established by under Central, State or Provincial Act for managing affairs of the temple cannot be regarded to be a person . Temple is different from its Managi ....... - .......