“disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)”

DisallowancesSection 40(a)(ia)Section 40(a)(ia)406 judgments

ACIT22(1), MUMBAI vs. UNIQUE BANGLES, MUMBAI

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

ITA 7427/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokaracit-22(1) Unique Bangles, 322, Piramal 232/234, Shah & Chambers, Mumbai – Vs. Nahar Industrial 400 013. Estate, S. J. Mar, Dhanraj Mill Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400019 Pan/Gir No. Aadfu8125A (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By Shri Vivek Perampurna, Ld. Dr Assessee By Shri Subhash Chhajed & Shri Sunil Vankawala, Ld. Ars Date Of Hearing 09.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2026

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 68

against the returned income of Rs. 87,43,270/-. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were as under: 1. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) on account of alleged failure to deduct tax at source on various payments such as purchases, professional fees, rent and other expenses ... section 36(1)(va) in respect of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution to provident fund – Rs. 2,480/-. 5. While making the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had allegedly failed to deduct tax at source or had made short deduction

CHOLAN TOURS PVT. LTD.,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRICHY

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

ITA 2277/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2277/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Cholan Tours Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 4, Annai Avenue, Vasantha Nagar Ward 1(1), Extension, Kollidakarai, Srirangam, Trichy. Trichy 620 006. [Pan: Aaecc2485L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A.S. Ramakrishnan, C.A. (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. C. Vatchala, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Ground No. 1(1, A, B & C) Raised By The Assessee In Challenging The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Disallowance Made Under Section 36(10(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] With Reference To The Employees’ Contribution To Provident Fund.

For Appellant: Shri A.S. Ramakrishnan, C.A. (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. C. Vatchala, CIT

Section 10Section 36Section 40

confirming the disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 9. We find that the Assessing Officer made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for violation of non-deposit of TDS to the Government account before filing of return of income. Further, the Assessing Officer

INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI vs. R L STEEL AND ENERGY LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3109/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshincome Tax Officer, Vs. Rl Steel & Energy Ltd, New Delhi 70, Daryaganj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacr5809B Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Bhargava, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(5)

decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S K Tekriwal reported in 361 ITR 432 (Cal) that disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act could not be made for short deduction of tax at source. Based on these observations, the Learned

CISCO COMMERCE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PCIT, BENGALURU-2, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1235/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 194JSection 263Section 40

into cognizance the fact that the Appellant has suo-motu considered the refund liabilities to the extent of INR 51.66 Cr for disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the Ld. PCIT has also erred in setting aside the entire final

IPHONLINE LIMITED (NOW AS ASAPP INFO GLOBAL SERVIES PVT LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's Appeal is partly allowed, in the\nabove terms

ITA 5946/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 36(2)(i)

aforesaid addition/disallowance by observing and holding as\nunder:\n“ii) Ground of Non Deduction of TDS on payments made: As\nregards the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961\nis concerned, it is noticed that the assessee has not furnished the\ndetails to demonstrate that

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 987/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: the disposal of the same.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

Mohammad, and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SSA’s Emerald Meadows. On merits, it was contended that the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was due to delayed deposit of TDS caused by financial constraints and that excess depreciation was claimed under a bona fide belief ... Assessing Officer has recorded a clear and categorical satisfaction that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) as well as excess depreciation claimed. The penalty order unequivocally states that the penalty has been levied for furnishing inaccurate particulars

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5258/MUM/2024[A.Y 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

disallowances under different provisions of the Act. These included disallowances under section 40A(3) on account of payments made in cash, disallowances under section 40(a)(ia) on account of alleged failure to deduct tax at source on certain payments, disallowances under section 37(1) treating salary, interest and other ... observations, the Assessing Officer made additions in Assessment Year 2010-11 including disallowance under section 40A(3) amounting to Rs.1,34,605/-, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs.1,75,616/-, disallowance of salary and interest expenses under section 37(1), addition under section 68 amounting to Rs.52

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5221/MUM/2024[A.Y 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5220/MUM/2024[A.Y 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

ALFA MODERN MOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), CR BUILDING

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5701/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Alfa Modern Mobiles Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito A-24/2, Naraina Industrial Ward-2(1) Area, Phase-I, C.R. Building New Delhi-110028. Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaica6087C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pranshu Goel, Ca & Shri Aditya Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 40Section 44ASection 46ASection 69A

confirmed by the learned CIT(A), as the assessee had adequate proof of payment which was not properly considered. 6. That the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) amounting to 17,06,740/- for non-deduction of TDS on Amazon commission was unwarranted, as the required TDS details were available

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

ITA 6703/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR related payments, employees’ contribution to provident fund under section 36(1)(va), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 43B, computation of capital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy of interest under sections 234B ... expenditure amounting to Rs. 2,53,96,666/-, disallowed employees’ contribution to provident fund amounting to Rs. 41,05,801/-, and made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs. 50,49,586/-. The CIT(A) confirmed all the above disallowances following the appellate order for the preceding year

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

ITA 6702/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43BSection 80G

expenditure\namounting to Rs. 2,53,96,666/-, disallowed employees'\ncontribution to provident fund amounting to Rs. 41,05,801/-\nand made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs.\n50,49,586/-. The CIT(A) confirmed all the above disallowances\nfollowing the appellate order for the preceding year

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6 (1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

ITA 6701/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43BSection 80G

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

ITA 6663/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR related payments, employees' contribution to provident fund under section 36(1)(va), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 43B, computation of capital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy of interest under sections 234B ... expenditure amounting to Rs. 2,53,96,666/-, disallowed employees' contribution to provident fund amounting to Rs. 41,05,801/-, and made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) amounting to Rs. 50,49,586/-. The CIT(A) confirmed all the above disallowances following the appellate order for the preceding year

GLOBAL DEVELOPERS,NELLORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

ITA 1683/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1683/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Global Developers, Vs. Dcit, Nellore. Circle-1, Pan: Aagfg8471R Nellore. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: None राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandi. P, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 04/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi. P, Sr. AR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

Tribunal held: if the payee (NBFC) had shown the interest income in its return and paid tax on it, then no disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) could be made. Shri Azmath Ulla vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore)  The AO disallowed interest payments to NBFCs without TDS.  Tribunal held disallowance ... Rs.23,60,945/- 5 Global Developers vs. DCIT , i.e., as capitalized by the AO, but at the same time upheld the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of 30% of the tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.11,57,283/- which the assessee firm had failed to deposit

BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2666/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 40

which according to the\nlearned PCIT himself ought to have been thoroughly examined by\nthe learned AO.\nGround No. 13 to 25: Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) in\nrespect of target discount, consistency discount and cash discount\nprovided to spare parts dealers ... ICDS-X relating to provisions\n6.4 Further, in the earlier years i.e. AY 2015-16 and AY 2016-17,\nsimilar disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was made. Accordingly,\nthe Assessing Officer was very well aware during the course of\nassessment proceedings that such disallowance was made in the\nearlier

ASSERTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4200/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 40

action of the AO rejecting the contention of the assessee that the provisions of section 1941A are not applicable and hence no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) can be made.\n\n5. The appellant craves the leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal ... compliance in respect of payments to residents which are currently not specified in section 40(a)(ia), it is proposed that the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall extend to all expenditure on which tax is deductible under Chapter XVII-B of the Act.\nThese amendments

ACIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and\nthe revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of\nour observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 881/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: \nShri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

expenditure under Section 69C\nof the Act: Rs. 34,58,38,297/-; (ii) disallowance of depreciation:\nRs. 3,11,24,473/-; (iii) disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the\nAct: Rs. 32,89,736/-; (iv) disallowance of interest on delayed\nremittance of TDS: Rs.1,37,887/-; and (v) addition ... under Section\n115BBE, enhancing the demand substantially.\n5. On appeal, the CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal,\nthe disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), and the addition of\nunexplained cash deposits. However, the CIT(A) was of the view\nthat although the disallowance

VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

Nos.737 & 881/Hyd/2025 4 of the Act: Rs. 34,58,38,297/-; (ii) disallowance of depreciation: Rs. 3,11,24,473/-; (iii) disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act: Rs. 32,89,736/-; (iv) disallowance of interest on delayed remittance of TDS: Rs.1,37,887/-; and (v) addition ... substantially. 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s appeal. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of depreciation, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), and the addition of unexplained cash deposits. However, the CIT(A) was of the view that although the disallowance

RAMANIYAM REAL ESTATES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I, LTU,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 2439/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

held": "The Tribunal noted that the assessee provided party-wise details showing payments did not exceed threshold limits for TDS. Therefore, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was not attracted. The Tribunal set aside the order and restored the matter to the AO for verification.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["40 ... ia)", "194I", "194J", "194C", "133(6)", "143(3)", "144B"], "issues": "Whether the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS at source is justified when the payments made to parties did not exceed the threshold limits

Showing 1–20 of 406 · Page 1 of 21

...