← All Phrases

“assessee in default”

TDS / TCSSection 201Section 2011,654 judgments

The decision most relied on for assessee in default is Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India (54 Taxmann.com 200), cited in 702 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on assessee in default

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
293 ITR 226 · 2007 · Supreme Court
576
citing judgments

The deductor cannot be treated as an assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) if the deductee has already paid the tax or offered the impugned receipts in their return of income. However, interest under Section 201(1A) for delayed deposit of tax can still be levied up to the date of filing of the return of income by the deductee.

Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai
84 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · ITAT
263
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be deleted merely due to technical defects in the penalty notice, such as not ticking the specific default, if the assessee understood the charges.

DIT v. GE Packaged Power Inc.
373 ITR 65 · 2015 · High Court
199
citing judgments

Interest under section 234B for default in payment of advance tax is not leviable when the entire income is subject to tax deduction at source under section 195, as no advance tax liability arises for the assessee in such circumstances.

247 ITR 305 (Guj) CIT v. Nestle India Ltd.
140 ITR 832 · 1983 · High Court
172
citing judgments

An employer is not in default under section 201 if they have made a bona fide estimate of employee income and deducted tax at source based on that estimate.

Jagaran Prakashan Ltd. v. DCIT
345 ITR 288 · 2012 · High Court
164
citing judgments

A deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default for failure to deduct tax at source if the recipient has already paid the income tax directly. The onus is on the deductor to prove that the recipient has paid the tax.

CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd.
340 ITR 333 · 2012 · High Court
161
citing judgments

A deductor's bonafide belief or reliance on a Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) can influence whether they are deemed an 'assessee in default' under Section 195 for failing to deduct tax at source on payments to non-residents. The decision clarifies the due diligence required when interpreting tax treaties and TRCs for TDS compliance.

CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.
325 ITR 148 · 2010 · High Court
155
citing judgments

Discounts offered to distributors under a tightly controlled relationship constitute commission and are subject to tax deduction at source under Section 194H of the Income-tax Act.

Judgments citing assessee in default

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2377/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shri Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2368/PUN/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025
For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2367/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shri Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh. Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2366/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shri Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh. Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2365/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2364/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

ITA 2363/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2362/PUN/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shri Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh. Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2361/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2360/PUN/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the respective assessee’s in ITA Nos

ITA 2359/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.476 To 480/Pun/2024 Chate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit,Tds Circle, Chate House, Plot No.4, Nashik Near N-2 Cricket Stadium, Cidco, Aurangabad – 431 003 Maharashtra Tan : Nskco1565E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2357/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Shree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan, Chh Sambhajinagar vs. Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the bunch of appeals filed by the

ITA 2356/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Aditya NavandarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 200ASection 234E

well. 4) That as per the provisions of sec 201(1) of the Act also a Deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default and TDS return cannot be treated as defective due to non-payment of late fees U/s 234E. a. It is submitted that, the filer ... treated as an assessee in default for non-payment of SA tax and interest along with return U/s 139(1). Moreover, the income tax return is also treated as defective U/s 139(9). On the contrary, section 201(1) only treats the assessee in default if the tax amount

Mahatma Gandhi State Institute of Rural Developement, Adhartal vs. ACIT TDS, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 820/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani, Accountant

Section 1Section 139Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

paid to a payee or on the sum credited to the account of a payee shall not be deemed to be an assessee in default in respect of such tax if such payee- (i) has furnished his return of income under section 139; (ii) has taken into account such ... paid to a payee or on the sum credited to the account of a payee but is not deemed to be an assessee in default under the first proviso to sub-section (1), the interest under clause (i) shall be payable from the date on which such tax was deductible

Ramchandra Dagdu Nikam, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Satara

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

ITA 2552/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vishal Makawane
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

case of Estate of Late TukojiRao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in their order. "If the party at whose instance the reference is made fails to appear at the hearing, or fails

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut vs. Prem Sapra, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 143(3)Section 54

well as the CIT(A) were fully aware of the fact that the Assessee could not be treated as an Assessee in default for non-deduction of TDS as per first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act and therefore never raised such issue. Moreover, non-deduction

DCIT(OSD)(TDS) - 2(3), Mumbai vs. Wockhardt Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2636/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ayush Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201(1)Section 250Section 40

facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee is not 'Assessee in default for TDS default reported in Tax Audit Report, without appreciating the fact that the assessee company did not discharge it's duty of deduction ... ordinate Bench in assessee's own case. The AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and treated the assessee as assessee in default to the tune of Rs. 34,22,45,206/- towards TDS under section 201(1) and interest under section Wockhardt Ltd. 201(1A). Aggrieved

Petrocil Engineering & Consultants Private Limited, Varkala vs. ITO (TDS), Thiruvananthapuram

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 225/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Years: 2022-23 Petrocil Engineers & Consultants Ito (Tds), Pvt. Ltd. V. Thiruvananthapuram

For Appellant: S. Rajeev, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

source thereon within the provisions of section 194C & 194J of the Act. As such, the Assessing Officer found the Appellant as 'an assessee in default u/s 201(1) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source as per the provisions of section 194J/194C of the Act. Accordingly

M/S. B.R. Dutta, Rampurhat, Birbhum vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Suri

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

ITA 29/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddym/S B R Dutta Vs Ito, Ward-3(1), Suri-731101 Shibtalla Para, Rampurhat, Birbhum-731224 Pan No. :Aahfb 7626 E (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri A.K.Tibrewal, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 08.11.2024 Passed For Assessment Year 2014-15, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 13,60,796 Made By Ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Suri Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For Failure Of The Assessee To Deduct Tax At Source On The Payments Made To Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Although The Said Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Had Declared The Receipt Of Income In Their Return Of Income & Paid Taxes Thereon. 2. That The Impugned Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Against Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Was Filed Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.3,90,520/-. The Assessee Is A Wholesaler/Distributor Of Fertilizer, Pesticides & Maintains Regular Books Of A/Cs. Which Is Audited U/S. 44Ab Of The 1.T. Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Debited As Amount Of 13,60,796/- To The Profit & Loss A/C. For Payment Of 2

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 40Section 44A

Income Tax Act no disallowance of expense u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made unless the assessee has been treated as assessee in default u/s.201(1) of the Act for its failure to deduct tax at source from the payment made on account of interest. Thus, the ld. Counsel pleaded

Lata Vikram Punvani Through Tehmina Punvani Leagl Heir, Lucknow vs. ITO-5(3), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 573/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

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

person who is deemed to be an assessee under any provision of this Act ; (c) every person who is deemed to be an assessee in default under any provision of this Act ; I.T.A. No.573/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 3 (D.1) From the said provision, it is apparent that for being