CHIEF MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER,RATLAM vs. DCIT, TDS, INDORE, INDORE

ITA 8/IND/2026Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 August 2026AY 2015-167 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Both the assessee and revenue agreed to this course of action.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Chief Medical and Health Officer, Ratlam, failed to deduct TDS on payments made to private hospitals and for bio-medical waste management. The appeals were filed with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was liable for non-deduction of TDS and subsequent interest, and whether the appeals should be heard on merits after condonation of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 194J

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI & SHRI ARVIND SONI

For Appellant: Shri Kunal Agarwal & Shri Harshit Choukse, ARs
For Respondent: Shri Binay Kumar Rai, Sr, DR
Hearing: 19.08.2026Pronounced: 25.08.2026

PER BENCH:

The above-mentioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless

Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "the ld. CIT(A)/JCIT(A)] for various quarters for Assessment Year

2012-13 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19

Chief Medical and health Officer Ratlam ITA No. 7/Ind/2026 & Others

arising out of the assessment orders framed u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").

2.

There is a delay between 60 to 300 days in filing the present appeals. An affidavit has been filed by a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →