Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal grants appeal on TDS credit for commission income, stresses income-credit matching.</h1> <h3>Mr. Raj Kapurchand Chandaria Versus Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax (CPC), Bengaluru and Income Tax officer (Int. Taxation) 1 (1), Mumbai.</h3> The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, finding that the issue regarding the credit of tax deducted at source on commission ... Grant credit of tax deducted at source on the commission received - Held that:- We find that the assessee has shown income of from commission of ₹ 1,42,89,500/--AY 2012-13 on which TDS was deducted on 31.03.2011. We further find that the AO assessed the income as shown by the assessee, however, credit was allowed of ₹ 37,08,000/- which was deducted during the financial year 2011-12 relevant assessment year 2012- 13 which was claimed by the assessee in the succeeding year i.e. AY 2013-14 as the corresponding income was received in that year. In other words, the ACIT allowed the credit of TDS which was deducted during the year whereas the assessee following system of accounting wherein the commission was shown as income under on receipt basis and also corresponding TDS was claimed. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the Id. CIT(A) that ACIT-CPC has rightly allowed credit of TDS from the commission as the assessee has claimed TDS which was deducted on 31.3.2011 whereas the TDS of ₹ 37,08,000/deducted during the financial year 2011-12 and the credit whereof was claimed in AY 2013-14 as the income was received in that year. The issue raised in this appeal stands covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mr. Anish Kapurchand Chandaria [2016 (11) TMI 655 - ITAT MUMBAI] we allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. Issues:1. Credit of tax deducted at source on commission income.Analysis:The appeal was against the order passed by the CIT(A)-10, Mumbai for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue raised was the incorrect granting of credit for tax deducted at source on commission income received from AEGIS Logistics Limited. The assessee had declared a total income of &8377; 1,42,97,500, which included commission income of &8377; 1,42,89,500, with tax deducted at source of &8377; 44,15,455. The ACIT-CPC processed the return and raised a demand due to discrepancies in the credit allowed. The First Appellate Authority upheld the ACIT-CPC's decision based on the date of the transaction and the year in which the income should have been disclosed. The assessee contended that the credit of TDS should match the income disclosed for the relevant assessment year.The assessee argued that the issue was similar to a decision by a co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in another case. The Tribunal found that the ACIT had allowed credit for TDS deducted in a different financial year than the one in which the income was received. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following the correct assessment year for income disclosure and TDS credit. It directed the AO to verify all contentions and ensure proper credit of prepaid taxes without any double claims. The Tribunal instructed the AO to grant sufficient opportunity for the assessee to present evidence and explanations.Considering the legal position and the facts presented, the Tribunal concluded that the issue raised in the appeal was covered by the decision in the referenced case. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the Open Court on 17.11.2016.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found