Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (1.30 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) Jaipur vs M/S Idea Cellular Limited on 5 October, 2018

Shri Vishal Aggarwal, New Delhi vs Ito, New Delhi on 30 January, 2020

9. Following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Idea Cellular Ltd. (supra), we hold that there was liability on the assessee to deduct tax at source on the recharge coupons sold by the assessee and as the assessee has failed to deduct tax at source, the said expenditure is not allowable under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Gajanand Agrawal(Huf), Dhanbad vs Acit Central Cir-3, Ranchi on 15 February, 2019

Besides the purpose of retaining a mobile phone connection with a service provider, the subscriber has no use or value for the Sim Card purchased by him from assessee's distributor. The position is same so far as Recharge coupons or E Topups are concerned which are only air time charges collected from the subscribers in advance. We have to necessarily hold that our findings based on the observations of the Supreme Court in BSNL's case (supra) in the context of sales tax in the case of BPL Cellular Ltd. (supra) squarely apply to the assessee which is nothing but the successor company which has taken over the business of BPL Cellular Ltd. in Kerala. So much so, there is no sale of any goods involved as claimed by the assessee and the entire charges collected by the assessee at the time of delivery of Sim Cards or Recharge coupons is only for rendering services to ultimate subscribers and the distributor is only the middleman arranging customers or subscribers for the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ranchi Cites 32 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Tata Sky Ltd., Mumbai vs A.C.I.T.(Tds) Rg.3(1), Mumbai on 12 October, 2018

539) being favourable to the assessee should be followed and not the case of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular Ltd.(325 ITR148). Thereafter the ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee placed reliance on several decisions of ITAT Mumbai including that of M/s. Bharat Business Channels Limited (ITA No.7047 & 7048/Mum/2012). He also referred to entries passed by the assessee and submitted that entries passed by the assessee regarding discount cannot be considered in the nature of commission liable u/s. 194H. In this regard he referred to scheme of entries.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 43 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kumar Urban Development Private Ltd.,, ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax,, on 14 August, 2019

Highlighting the facts of the present case, ld. Counsel submitted that an identical issue came for adjudication before the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idea Cellular Ltd. (supra). The said judgment is relevant for the legal proposition that where new cellular towers were constructed by cellular operator in addition to existing tower and no new business was set up, when the project was abandoned, the expenditure so far incurred would be allowed as business expenditure. Further, referring to the ITAT, Pune Bench decision in the case of Daimler Chrysler India (P.)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, Chennai vs Shriram Epc Limited, Chennai on 8 January, 2020

39. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on records. Admittedly, an amount of D2,19,02,210/- was incurred by the assessee in connection with new power projects. The power projects were abandoned for various reasons. Therefore the question that arises before us is whether this can be allowed as revenue expenditure. Admittedly, assessee is also in the business of wind power generation. The business of power generation is an existing one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.9 ( ... vs Ito (Tds) Ward 1(6), Chennai on 18 May, 2020

63. It was contended by the revenue that; in the event of the assessee deducting the amount and paying into the department, ultimately if the "dealer is not liable to tax it is always open to him to seek for refund of the tax and, therefore, it cannot be said that Section 194H is not attracted to the case on hand. As stated earlier, on a proper construction of Section 194H and keeping in mind the object with which Chapter XVII is introduced, the person paying should be in possession of an income which is chargeable to 9 ITA Nos. 1348 & 1349 and 1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 tax under the Act and which belongs to the payee. A statutory obligation is cast on the payer to deduct the tax at source and remit the same to the Department. If the payee is not in possession of the net income which is chargeable to tax, the question of payer deducting any tax does not arise. As held by the Apex Court in Bhavani Cotton Mills Limited's case, if a person is not liable for payment of tax at all, at any time, the collection of tax from him, with a possible contingency of refund at a later stage will not make the original levy valid.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 19 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next