Case LawHigh Court › Had Failed To Deduct Tds Thereon? v. Kot...

Had Failed To Deduct Tds Thereon? v. Kotak Securities Ltd. Reported In {2012} 340 Itr 333 (Bom

High Court 09 Jan 2013 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Had Failed To Deduct Tds Thereon? v. Kotak Securities Ltd. Reported In {2012} 340 Itr 333 (Bom
Date of order
09 Jan 2013
Assessment year(s)
2005-06
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Had Failed To Deduct Tds Thereon? v. Kotak Securities Ltd. Reported In {2012} 340 Itr 333 (Bom, the High Court (2013) decided the matter.

Decision: 3)In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the order in the matter of Kotak Securities Ltd.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

ASN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1137 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax-4. v.HDFC Securities Ltd. ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta, Sr. Counsel with Ms. Padma Divakar for the Appellant. Mr. A.K.Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : 09TH JANUARY, 2013 PC: This appeal by the revenue against the order dated 2/2/2010 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to assessment year 2005-06 raises the following question of law for consideration by this Court. a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that Data processing/transaction charges paid to the Stock Exchange by the assessee company amounting to Rs.42,40,116/- was allowable as a deduction from taxable income even though the assessee had failed to deduct TDS thereon? b)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that Data processing/transaction charges paid to the Stock Exchange by the assessee company were not paid in consideration of technical services rendered by the Stock Exchange within the meaning of Section 194J read with Explanation 2 to Section 9I1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act? 2)The Advocate for the appellant and the respondent states that the issue raised in the above two questions are covered by the decision of this court in the matter of CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. reported in {2012} 340 ITR 333 (Bom.). 3)In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the order in the matter of Kotak Securities Ltd. (supra). No order as to costs. (M.S.SANKELCHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan