Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (3.07 seconds)
Documents citing Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Limited ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 9 March, 2016

Indorama Synthetics (India) Ltd. vs The Additional Commissioner Of ... on 25 July, 2016

23. For all the aforesaid reasons, the Court is of the view that the three references made by the AO to the TPO on the question of determination of ALP of the alleged international transactions involving the Petitioner and its AE have been made without affording the Petitioner an opportunity of being heard as was required by law. This, as explained by the Bombay High Court in Vodafone India Services (P) Limited v. Union of India (supra), and reaffirmed by the CBDT‟s Instruction No. 3 of 2016, is a procedural requirement implicit in Section 92 CA (1) of the Act. Accordingly, the said three references made by the AO to the TPO for determination of the said question for the AYs 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 are hereby set aside.
Delhi High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 3 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Vedanta Limited vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 24 February, 2023

Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Eli Lilly and Company (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2009 ]312 ITR 225 (SC); Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Limited v. Union of India, (2016) 385 ITR 436 (Del); Transmission Corporation of A.P. Ltd. v. CIT, [1999] 239 ITR 587 at 594. 23/38 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).Nos.11831 of 2019 etc., batch residents, is in view of the fact that legislative actions are presumed to be reasonable and there is also a presumption that the legislature enacts laws that are directed to problems which are made manifest by experience and that legislature enact laws which they consider to be reasonable for the purpose for which they are enacted. In this regard, it may be relevant to refer to the following judgments:
Madras High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - M Shaffiq - Full Document

Income Tax Officer, Tds-3, Jaipur vs M/S Eid Mohammad Nizamuddin , Tonk on 23 July, 2019

3. TDS and TCS provisions are the same: It is not denied that the law of TDS and TCS is similar, therefore, the law developed in the context of Sec.201 and more particular with regard to the limitation provisions, is fully applicable in the cases of TCS as well. Originally, there was no limitation provision incorporated in Sec.201. It is only by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 that new Subsections 3 and 4 were inserted w.e.f 01.04.2010 which provided the time limits of two years or 4 years from the end of the F.Y. depending upon the facts. However, the proviso to Sec 201(3) has fixed a cutoff date of 31.03.2011, in the cases where the relevant FY was 2007-08 or the earlier one. This aspect has been elaborately dealt with in the case of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. v/s UOI & Ors. (2016) 385 1TR 436 (Del).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 30 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

M/S. Green Line (Punjab), New Delhi vs Ito (Tds), New Delhi on 10 May, 2023

10. Prior to the amendment in section 201(3) by the Finance Act, 2012 w.r.e.f. 01.04.2010, there was no stipulation provided in the Act for passing an order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) holding a person to be an assessee in default. In fact, this fact is also explained by the CBDT Circular No.05/2010 dated 03.06.2010 which explains the amended provisions w.r.e.f. 01.04.2010 prescribing time limit for framing an order u/s 201 of the Act. In fact, the said Circular says that this amendment would be effective from 01st April, 2010 only and would apply to such orders passed on or after 1st April, 2010. We find that the ld. DR took shelter based on this CBDT Circular before us stating that since the order in the instant case was passed on 29.03.2011 which is after 01.04.2010, the said order is passed within the time limit prescribed in section 201(3) of the Act r.w. proviso thereto. We find that the very same issue was subject matter of consideration before the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. vs. Union of India, reported in 385 ITR 436 referred to supra. The Circular has to be interpreted in such a manner that the time limit stipulated in section 201(3) of the Act would apply only for those orders passed on or after 1.4.2007 and not earlier.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs M/S Id. Mohd. Nizamuddin, Tonk on 29 August, 2018

The Hon'ble High Court was of the view that the time limit for completing the assessment as per Section 153(1)(a) is two years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable which was considered as reasonable period for passing the order U/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court has turned down the contention of limitation provided U/s 147/148 of the Act and hence, it was observed that three years would be a reasonable period as prescribed by Section 153 for completion of proceedings. However, since the Tribunal in a series of decisions had taken a view that the period within which the order U/s 201(1)/201(1A) shall be passed would be four years and therefore, the Hon'ble High Court has refrained from disturbing the view taken by this Tribunal. Following the said decision, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in a subsequent decision in the case of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. Vs Union of India & ors. (supra) has reiterated the view taken in the case of CIT Vs NHK Japan Broadcasting (supra).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Green Line (Punjab), New Delhi vs Ito (Tds), New Delhi on 16 May, 2018

The amendment as well as the said CBDT circular had come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services vs. Union of India (supra) wherein Hon'ble High Court after detailed discussion referring to the catena of judgments held that CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2011, clarifying that the proviso to section 201(3) which was made to extend the time limit of completing the proceedings and passing orders in relation to the pending cases cannot be interpreted so as to enable the department to initiate proceedings for declaring assessee to be 'assessee in default' u/s 201 of the Act for a period earlier than four years prior to 31st March, 2011. Accordingly, their lordship held that the barred limit of four years which was earlier held by the Courts to be applicable in such 3 cases cannot be extended by said amendment. Thus, respectfully following the ratio laid down Hon'ble High Court, we hold that the initiation of proceedings u/s 201(1) and consequently passing of order u/s 201(1) / 201(1)(A) on 29.3.2011 is barred by limitation and accordingly, the tax liability in interest is quashed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Mass Awash Pvt.Ltd.Thru Its ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 10 July, 2017

51. Delhi High Court in Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Limited Vs. Union of India (2016) 67 taxmann.com 124 (Delhi) raises a question of validity of action taken by Revenue under Section 201(1) and (1A) for non-deduction of TDS for a period earlier than four years prior to 31.3.2011. In that case, amendments made by Finance Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2010, inserting Subsections 3 and 4 along with proviso to sub-section (3) was considered. Revenue has not taken recourse to Sub-section 3 and 4 inserted by Finance Act, 2009, hence, for the case in hand, we do not find this judgment of any help to Assessee in any manner.
Allahabad High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 1 - S Agarwal - Full Document

Id. Mohd. Nizamuddin, Jaipur vs Ito, Jaipur on 27 October, 2017

that the revenue authorities are bound to exercise the powers within a reasonable time. It was held that a period four years constitute a reasonable time. After taking into account the various period of limitation which ranges from 2 to 4 years except in exceptional case, it was held that intention of the parliament not to prescribe limitation has not given license to the AO to hold the assessee to ransom for all time to come but to ensure that all pre-assessment taxes are collected promptly and such proceedings are finalized much before taking up the regular assessment proceedings. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. vs. UOI & Ors(supra).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji Cites 27 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next