Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 121 (1.81 seconds)
Documents citing Transmission Corpn. Of Ap Ltd. vs Asstt. Cit, Circle (2) on 24 February, 2005

Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) ... vs The Dy. Cit on 28 February, 2007

10. Next, the ld. senior counsel referred to Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. v. CIT (supra) and submitted that since the assessee as well as the Department are relying on this decision, it would be appropriate to analyse the decision in detail and for that he submitted that he would like to start with the decision rendered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court where the case was titled as CIT v. Superintending Engineer 152 ITR 753 (AP). In that case, the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board ("Electricity Board" for short) made payments to three foreign parties on which no tax was deducted. In case of one party, the Electricity Board had made an application Under Section 195(2). During the proceedings Under Section 201, the Assessing Officer estimated the tax to be deducted on whole of the payments in respect of two foreign parties, where no application was made and in case where application was made, the profit was estimated and tax to he deducted was determined. Various questions were raised before the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, but the ld. Counsel of the assessee pointed out that ultimately the court itself refrained the questions by observing that two fundamental questions arise and the questions were reframed as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 62 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii vs Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt. Ltd on 17 November, 2017

23. The learned counsel for the Assessee points out that as far as question (i) is concerned, all the submissions of the Revenue have been comprehensively answered against it in the decision of this Court in Herbalife HC. As regards question (ii) which pertains to the applicability of Section 195 of the Act, the decision in Transmission Corporation (supra) is sought to be distinguished on facts.
Delhi High Court Cites 71 - Cited by 2 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Abishek Developers vs Income Tax Officer on 31 October, 2006

6.6 Thus, for these reasons, we follow the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of India Hotels Company Ltd. (supra) and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Transmission Corporation of AP v. CIT and uphold the contention of the assessee that the transaction in question is a transaction of sale and not a case of rendering technical services as contemplated under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act and even otherwise no part of the service is rendered in India and thus, the assessee cannot be held to be an assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source. Thus, this ground the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 23 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Paradeep Phosphates Limited, ... vs Acit, Bhubaneswar on 9 November, 2017

In our view, the above observations of this Court in Transmission Corpn. of A.P. Ltd. 's case (supra) ,which is put in italics has been completely, with respect, misunderstood by the Karnataka High Court to mean that it is not open for the payer to contend that if the amount paid by him to the non-resident is not at all "chargeable to tax in India", then no TAS is required to be deducted from such payment. This interpretation of the High Court completely loses sight of the plain words of section 195(1) which in clear terms lays down that tax at source is deductible only from "sums chargeable" under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, i.e., chargeable under sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Income-tax Act."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, Bhubaneswar vs M/S. Paradeep Phosphates Limited, ... on 9 November, 2017

In our view, the above observations of this Court in Transmission Corpn. of A.P. Ltd. 's case (supra) ,which is put in italics has been completely, with respect, misunderstood by the Karnataka High Court to mean that it is not open for the payer to contend that if the amount paid by him to the non-resident is not at all "chargeable to tax in India", then no TAS is required to be deducted from such payment. This interpretation of the High Court completely loses sight of the plain words of section 195(1) which in clear terms lays down that tax at source is deductible only from "sums chargeable" under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, i.e., chargeable under sections 4, 5 and 9 of the Income-tax Act."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S.Chennai Petroleum Corporation ... vs The Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 8 March, 2021

“2.References were received from field officers on the issue of deduction of tax at source under section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court of India in the case of GE India Technology Private Limited Vs. CIT 327 (ITR) 456 and 17/22 T.C.A.No.291 of 2018 Transmission Corporation of AP Limited and another Vs. CIT (1999) 299 (1TR) 587, and the decision of the Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Water Tax Cases Appeals Nos.500-501 of 2005, with a request for clarification as to whether the tax is to be deducted under subsection (1) of section 195 on the whole sum being remitted to a non-resident or only the portion representing the sum chargeable to tax, particularly if no application has been made under subsection 2) of section 195 of the Act to determine the sum.
Madras High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 1 - T S Sivagnanam - Full Document

M/S Glaxosmithkline Asia Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Dcit, Chandigarh on 30 July, 2021

b) The additional evidence filed by the appellant are admitted as these go to the route of the matter and AO has also not objected for admission. Circular 2/2014 came much after the relevant assessment was completed in the light of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme in the case of GE Technology Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT and Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. vs. CIT. But the circular is clarificatory in ITA No.2453/Del/2016 A.Y. 2005-06 & ITA No.532/Del/2014 A.Y. 2006-07 34 nature as this was issued against various references received from the field officers by the CBDT in which clarification was sought whether the tax is to be deducted under sub section 1 of section 195 on the whole sum being remitted to a non-resident or only the portion representing the sum chargable to tax particularly if no application has been made under subsection 2 of section 195 of the Act to determine the sum. Vide circular No 3/2015 dated 12.02.2015 CBDT has clarified as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 83 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Alloy Steel Emporium Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs Assessee on 27 April, 2016

10. However, it is noted that the amount remitted by the appellant to the overseas entity had two components. The first one was towards cost of logistic services provided by them and the second was share in profit. The first component was nothing but reimbursement of cost of logistic services provided by the overseas entities. The ITO is of the opinion that the entire remittance was liable to be TDS u/s. 195 of the Act. For this, he has drawn strength from the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Transmissions Corporation of AP, Ltd. vs. CIT 105 Taxman 742.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 62 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Google India Private Limited, ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 11 May, 2018

147. We have also carefully examined the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of GE India Technology Cen. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT 327 ITR 456, CIT Vs. Eli Lilly and Co., (India) Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd., Vs. CIT (supra), in which it has been repeatedly held that liability of deducting tax at source is in the nature of vicarious liability which pre-supposes existence of primary liability, the said liability is a vicarious liability and the principal liability is of the person who is taxable. It was also observed in those judgments that the plea of bonafide belief cannot be taken for non-deducting of TDS when it is clear that TDS is required to be deducted as per section 195 of the Act. The plea of bonafide belief can only be considered while adjudicating the issue of penalty to be levied under section 271C of the Act.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 141 - Cited by 387 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next