How many judgments cite Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT?

11 judgments on BharatTax cite Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT (278 ITR 206), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(1), Section 205, Section 199, Section 234A, Section 234B, Section 234C.

Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT

278 ITR 206High Court2005#9627 most cited

What is Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT authority for?

Section 205 of the Income Tax Act prevents the tax department from demanding tax from an assessee who has already suffered TDS when the liability has shifted to another entity, such as a liquidator.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smt. Ansuya Alva v DCIT · section 205 · credit for TDS · tax deducted at source · section 199 · company in liquidation · official liquidator · demand of tax · bar under section 205

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 205 Section 199 Section 234A Section 234B Section 234C Section 200 Section 221(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 205 credit for tds section 199 tax deducted at source section 20 section 234a section 19 section 234 salary section 23 section 143(1)assistant commissioner

Judgments citing Smt. Ansuya Alva v. DCIT

Karthik Lakshman, Chennai vs. Iyo, Intl Taxationward-1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2182/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2182/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2024-25

For Respondent: Ms. R.Kavitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 250

…n’ble High Court has relied on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Yashpal Sahni vs Rekha Hajarnavis vs ACIT, reported in [2007] 293 ITR 539 (Bom) and the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Ansuya Alva vs DCIT reported in [2005] 278 ITR 206 wherein Court held that, “the facts and circumstances of the above case is similar to the facts of the present case. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the bar under sec. 205 of the Act prevents the department from demanding the tax deducted at source from the assessee who has suffered a deduction. Further, more now the liability rests…

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6990/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025

Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 6990 & 6989/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 & 2022-23 Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Pvt. DCIT-Central Circle-7(3), Ltd., 655, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 3rd floor, N.M. Joshi Marg Lodha Maharishi Karve Road, Excelus, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400011. PAN NO. AALCS 7775 C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ravikant Pathak : Mr. Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR Revenue by : 25/02/2025 Date of Hearing : 25/02/2025 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH K…

Tomorrow Capital Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 6989/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: 25/02/2025

Section 143(1)

Xander Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur

ITA 549/RPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 549/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Taranuum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 205Section 234Section 234BSection 250

…recover the TDS amount from the persons who as deducted it. The assessee, therefore, should not be penalized for the act of deductors. Ld. AR placed his reliance on the following judgments and office memorandum issued by CBDT: a. Smt. Anusuya Alva Vs. DCIT [ 278 ITR 206 (Kart.)] -- relevant page - 97 and 98 of PB b. Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain Vs. Union of India [ 309 CTR 218 (Born) ] - Page - 104 of PB, 6 Xander Finance Private Limited vs ACIT, Central-1(1), Raipur c. Incredible Unique Buildcon Pvt Ltd. Vs. ITO (Delhi)- Page 111 of PB d. Yashpal Sahni Vs. Rekha Hajamavis, ACIT [ 293 ITR 539 (Born)] Page 118…

Shri. S. Sathyaraj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1529/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1529/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri. S. Sathyaraj, Assistant Commissioner Of No. 13A, Brahadambal Road, V. Income Tax, Nungambakkam, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aafps-6100-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 201(1)Section 205

Altico Capital India Limited, Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 372/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: The Cit(A) Which Was Dismissed By The Cit(A) Vide Its Order, Dated 13/12/2022. Now The Appellant Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Aforesaid Order Of The Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Snayogita Nagpal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 205Section 234A

…Memorandum, dated 11/03/2016 and the following judicial precedents – (a) Yashpal Saini v Rekha Hajarnavis and other [2007] 293 ITR 539 [Bom. HC]; (b) Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain v Union of India [2019] 262 Taxman 118 [Bom. HC]; (c) Anusuya Alva v DCIT [2005] 278 ITR 206 [Karnataka HC] Sanjay Sudan v ACIT [2023] 331 CTR 797 [Delhi HC]; and (d) Milan Arvindbhai Patel v ACIT [2023] 455 ITR 82 [Gujarat HC]. Alternatively, it was contended by the Learned Authorised Representative for the Appellant that if it is concluded that the deductor/payer has failed to deduct tax at source, then 3 income as accounted by the Ap…

Shri Harinder Pal Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 123/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 153ASection 154Section 205Section 250

…oyer. This Court in such background after referring to Section 205 of the Act held and observed.” 3.2 The ld. counsel for the assessee further relied on the order of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Anusuya Aiva vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 278 ITR 206 (Karn). The observation of the Hon’ble High Court in page 16 para no. 2 is reproduced as under: “2. The assessee had responded to the notice, pointing out that the demands for the years 1999-2000 to 2001-02 were not correct or justified; that the said demand included even the amounts that had been deducted by her tenant, one M/s Krisen Developmen…

Bsr Infratech India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 697/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 199Section 234ASection 270ASection 43Section 43C

…ovisions are made under the Act for recovery of tax deducted at source from the person who has deducted such tax". 8.9 Following the above judgment, Karnataka High Court in the case of Smt. Ansuya Alva vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2005) 278 ITR 206, interpreting Sec.205, has held that "If we look at the scheme for the provision of deduction of tax at source, it becomes obvious that such person is acting on behalf of the Revenue, i.e., as an agent of the Revenue. In fact, the person is enabled statutorily to make deduction and remit the amount to the Central Government. Even on the general p…

M/S. Rao & Venkatesulu, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 305/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Ningoji Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199

…efit of TDS credit in respect of income disclosed in the current assessment year in light of the provisions of section 199 r.w.s. 205 of the I.T.Act. In this context, the learned AR relied on the following case laws:- (i) Smt.Anusuya Alva v. DCIT reported in 278 ITR 206 (Kar.). (ii) Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT &* Ors. [2007) 293 ITR 539 (Bom.) (iii) ACIT & Ors. V. Om Prakash GAttani [2000] 242 ITR 638 (Gau). (iv) CIT v. Ranoli Investment P. Ltd. & Ors. [1999] 235 ITR 433 (Guj.) (v) Capt.J.G.Joseph v. JCIT 303 ITR (A.T.) 395 [ITAT, Mumbai]. 5.1 It was further submitted by the learned AR that the Assessing Officer while…

M/S Shyam Enterprise, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 324/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.324/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Income Tax Officer, M/S Shyam Enterprise, Ward 1(3), Vs. Shop No.3, Prasang Complex, Rajkot. 150 Ft. Ring Road, Rajkot.

Section 133(6)Section 244A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (CONDUCTED THROUGH E-COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.324/RJT/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Income Tax Officer, M/s Shyam Enterprise, Ward 1(3), Vs. Shop No.3, Prasang Complex, Rajkot. 150 Ft. Ring Road, Rajkot. PAN: ABLFS4153Q (Applicant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Written Submission : Revenue by Ms Nameeta Khurana, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 18/06/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/06/2019…

Dev Prakash Gupta, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 811/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Dev Prakash Gupta, No.5 & 6, Milia Building, N.R.Road, Bengaluru-560002. Pan:Acqpg 1933 Q … Appellant Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Bengaluru. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Balaram R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

…id party showing deduction of tax at source at the rate of 16.995% on monthly rental income of Rs.4,03,200/- was shown. Therefore, it is claimed that as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Smt.Anusuya Alva vs. DCIT (278 ITR 206)(Kar), credit should be allowed to the assessee and recovery of tax from the assessee should not be enforced for default of deductor to remit the amount to the account of the Central Government. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative vehemently argued that in absence of any evidence for deduction of tax at source, credit cannot be…