“credit for TDS”

TDS / TCSSection 199Section 199603 judgments

The decision most relied on for credit for TDS is Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (127 Taxmann 523), cited in 162 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on credit for TDS

Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders

127 Taxmann 523 · 2003 · High Court

162

citing judgments

An assessee is required to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of a cash credit in their books of accounts, such as an unsecured loan, but is generally not required to prove the source of the source for such credits. Additions under Section 68 are deleted if sufficient proof of creditors, repayment, and TDS on interest is provided.

Trib.), and Noida Commercial Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. ITO(TDS)

64 Taxmann.com 158 · 2015 · Reported

citing judgments

A multi-state cooperative bank is obligated to deduct tax at source on interest paid or credited on fixed deposits placed by cooperative societies, as per Section 194A(1) read with Section 194A(3) of the Act, unless an exemption applies.

CIT v. JDS Apparels (P.) Ltd.

370 ITR 454 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Payments to banks for credit card transaction processing are considered bank charges or fees for services rendered, not commission or brokerage, and therefore are not subject to TDS under Section 194H of the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co.

357 ITR 396 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to credit for TDS even if the certificate is issued in the name of a joint venture or related party, provided the income to which the TDS relates is offered by the assessee. This principle emphasizes looking at the substance of the transaction over strict adherence to the name on the TDS certificate.

Escorts Ltd. v. DCIT

15 SOT 368 · 2007 · ITAT

citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) even if the income in respect of which TDS was deducted is not disclosed in the return. The Income-tax Department cannot deny TDS credit solely on the grounds that the income was not offered to tax.

Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT

293 ITR 539 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

Once tax has been deducted at source (TDS), the bar of section 205 applies, preventing the deductee from being asked to pay the tax again, even if the deductor fails to deposit the tax or issue TDS certificates.

Supreme Renewable Energy Ltd. v. ITO

3 ITR (Trib) 339 · 2010 · ITAT

citing judgments

Once Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) is deducted and paid to the Central Government, credit for such tax must be given to the assessee, irrespective of the assessment year to which it relates. This principle applies even to amended provisions of Section 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

PCIT v. Shree Aradhana Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd.

172 Taxmann.com 537 · 2025 · High Court

citing judgments

A co-operative society is primarily a co-operative society, and therefore, it is not required to deduct tax at source on interest payments made on time deposits to other co-operative societies, by virtue of Section 194A(3)(v).

Judgments citing credit for TDS

Vodafone Digilink Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee Ground Nos 9 & 10 is allowed

ITA 1169/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla/wShriFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 35ASection 36(1)(m)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(1)

Source (TDS') On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in granting credit for TDS of Rs 61,00,63,817 instead of Rs 65,58,50,566 claimed by the Appellant in its revised return of income

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. Infosys Employee Benefits Trust, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2214/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B R, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT-DR

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 244A

23AAA). In the said intimation, the CPC had refunded the advance tax and the interest and the CPC had not taken into the credit the TDS amount even though the said TDS was reflected in form 26AS. Thereafter, the assessee filed a rectification request through the portal and an order ... assessee aggrieved with the said intimation, had filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and contended that the non-granting of the credit for TDS is not correct since the said TDS was also reflected in form 26AS. The Ld.CIT(A) had considered the case on merits and accepted that

Akshay Gajanan Suryawanshi Deshmukh, Chikhli vs. ITO Ward-2, Khamgaon

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

ITA 385/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 115BSection 234ASection 250Section 37Section 68

computed in the assessment order. Difference computed by A.O. at Rs.81,77,000/- is unjustified, unwarranted. 17) A.O. erred in not granting credit for TDS at Rs.56,445/- while determining tax payable at the hands of assessee. 18) The assessee denies liability to pay interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C

Sudhir S. Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 417/MUM/2023[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Dharmesh Shah, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. P. Daniel – Spl. Counsel

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 220(2)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

light of Supreme Court direction vide order dated 13.02.2002 in Civil Appeal No. 7572 of 1999, in which Hon'ble Court directed that credit for TDS may be allowed only against the income for statutory period of 01.04.1991 to 06.06.1992. v) Penalty is initiated u/s.271

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cen.Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Sudhir Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai

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

ITA 1179/MUM/2023[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Dharmesh Shah, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. P. Daniel – Spl. Counsel

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

Chaturvedi Sk & Fellows LLP, Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer 16(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 5700/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMRJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Srikant ChaturvediFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani

Section 154Section 250

same income to tax on receipt basis in the return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The authorities below had denied credit for TDS on account for the fact that in the return of income for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 entry for carry forward of TDS ... Assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, we deemed it appropriate to restore the issue of grant of credit for TDS INR.3,30,000/- back to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to the Assessing Officer to grant credit of the aforesaid TDS

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited, Mumbai, Maharashtra

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5332/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Us It Has Been Submitted That Now Form 3Cl Has Been Issued By The Dsir Wherein Following R & D Expenditure Has Been Held To Be Eligible For Deduction U/S 35(2Ab). (In Lakhs) Assessment Year 2019-20

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 199Section 35

restricted at Rs.90,90,12,626/- as against Rs.91,97,31,885/- as stated by the assessee. Thus, there is short grant of credit for TDS of Rs.107,19,259/-. It was further submitted that in the proceedings u/s.154, TDS credit of only Rs.28,04,66,042/- was given ... credit claimed by your appellant should be granted. The appellants, therefore, request your honours to kindly direct the Assessing officer to grant full credit of TDS of Rs. 91,97,31,885/- as claimed by your appellant." 9. The ld. CIT(A) has directed the ld. AO to grant full

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Chandrapur vs. Nitin Subhash Sharma, Chandrapur

In the result, appeals by the Revenue for the A

ITA 364/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 194CSection 44A

directed to re-compute the total income of the appellant in above ter ms. AO is also directed to allow the credit for TDS as per Form 26AS as the relevant income reflected in Form 26AS is assessed in this AY 2013-14 and as per Rule 37BA

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Chandrapur vs. Nitin Subhash Sharma, Chandrapur

In the result, appeals by the Revenue for the A

ITA 363/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 194CSection 44A

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Chandrapur vs. Nitin Subhash Sharma, Chandrapur

In the result, appeals by the Revenue for the A

ITA 362/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 194CSection 44A

Suryakanth Reddysheetywar, Adilabad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Nirmal

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

ITA 1255/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srikanth Reddy Y, Sr. AR

Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 250Section 250(6)

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) was passed in the case of the assessee wherein assessee’s claim for credit of TDS to the extent of Rs. 93,580/- against assessee’s TDS claim of Rs. 5,96,517/- was denied by the CPC, Bengaluru on the ground that

Kanuga Pratheek, Guntur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Guntur

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

ITA 409/VIZ/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.409/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2023-24) Kanuga Pratheek V. Acit – Circle – 2(1) Income Tax Office C/O. R.K. Traders, D.No. 5-84-1 Lakshmi Puram Main Road 2Nd Line, Pandaripuram Guntur – 522006, Andhra Pradesh Guntur – 522002, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Awcpk4812A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154

admitting total income of Rs.59,64,490. The return was processed u/s.143(1) and intimation was issued on 11.12.2023. The CPC allowed credit for TDS of only Rs.47,213 as against TDS of Rs.15,84,781 claimed by the appellant on account of erroneous application of Rule 37BA

Jil Information Technology Limited, New Delhi vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

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

ITA 539/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

pages 299 to 313 of the paper bok) Revised Ground No. 3 Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the credit of TDS of Rs.92,20,398/- Copy of acknowledgement of return along with computation of income showing credit of TDS is placed at pages 238 to 243 of the paper ... foregoing, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the aforesaid addition of Rs.64,88,451/-. (D) The second dispute is regarding credit for TDS. In this regard the learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer be directed to give credit for TDS in accordance with law. Learned

Punit Deora Trust, Mum vs. ITO, Ward-25(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6249/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Ms.Renu Jauhripunit Deora Trust, C/O Vs. Income Tax Department Mumbai – Punit International, 17, Fair Field Society, Opp. K.C. College Churchgate,Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaatp1811E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. S.L. Jain & Sh. Satish Jain, Revenue By Sh. Mahesh Pamnani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 15.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2025 आदेश / Order Per: Amit Shukla, Jm: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.10.2024 Passed By Addl./Jcit (A), Bhubaneshwar, In Relation To The Adjust Assessment Made U/S 143(1) For The Year 2018-19. 2. In Various Grounds Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged Firstly, Not Granting Of Deduction U/S 24(A) To Rs.1,97,80,200/- As Claimed By The Assessee By Computing The Income From House

Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 161Section 24

Rs.6,69,38,890/- as against “Nil” income by treating the income from house property as business income; Secondly, non granting of credit for TDS deducted from house property. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private specified beneficiary trust registered

Saurya Urja Company of Rajasthan Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 965/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

whereas in the order u/s 143(1), the credit has been given of Rs.1,15,45,496/-. Thus, AOCPC had restricted the credit for TDS of Rs.86,66,719/-. 4.1.1 During the appellate proceedings it was submitted that TDS credit was restricted based on receipts as per form 26AS without ... whereas in the order u/s 143(1), the credit has been given of Rs.1:15.45 496 Thus, AO CPC had restricted the credit for TDS of Rs 86,66,719. The working of proportionate credit of TDS as per rule 37BA, provided in the intimation is as under- Computed

Deepshikha Trading Company Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1957/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

computation sheet forming part of the order u/s 143(3) of the Act, the credit for TDS and advance tax of Rs. 1,23,331/- and Rs. 1,75,000/- respectively pertaining to the amalgamating company was allowed. Aggrieved with the non-allowance of the two credits, the assessee filed ... filed before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee contested that the Ld. AO erred on the facts and in law in not allowing credit of TDS and Advance Tax for Rs. 1,23,331/- and Rs. 1,75,000/- respectively in the assessment order dated 12.02.2021 passed

Flemingo Liners Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Wqard-15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6176/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(7)Section 234B

rectification order is reproduced as under:- "The assessee company has filed letters dated 29.10.2020 and 10.02.2021in this office stating therein that credit for TDS of Rs.51,39,779/- was not given while completing the assessment u/s.143(3) for A.Y. 2012-13 and therefore, requested to issue refund after giving ... rectification within the time limit prescribed in sec.154 of the Act. In view of the above, the assessee's request for giving credit to TDS of Rs.51,39,779/- cannot be considered at this stage and, therefore, the same is hereby rejected." 4. Concurring with the AO, the ld.CIT

Ravina Nishant Bhojwani, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax CPC Banglore, Mumbai

The appeal is allowed’

ITA 2638/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath

Section 143(1)Section 250

claimed credit for applicable TDS against tax liability on the total income. The Appellant submits that the AO ought to have given credit for TDS amount of Rs.15,62,722/-, while passing order u/s.143(1) of the I.T. Act.” 3. The Appellant is an individual deriving income from Capital Gain ... Appellant. During the course of hearing the Learned Authorised Representative for the Appellant had submitted that the Appellant should be granted credit for TDS as per Section 199 of the Act and had placed on record copy of order, dated 04/09/2024, passed by the CIT(A) in the case

Mula Parisar Serva Seva Sangh, Sonai vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Nsk, Nashik

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

ITA 632/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.632/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mula Parisar Serva Seva Vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Sangh, Nashik. At Post- Sonal, Tal.- Newasa, Dist.- Ahmednagar- 414105. Pan : Aaatm7100K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mihir Bapat Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Coimbatore For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Allowing Credit For Tds Of Rs.1,18,77,593/- As Claimed In The Return Of Income & As Per 26As Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-. 2) Interest U/S 244A On Refund – Not Grated By A.O. 3) Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Providing Any Reasons In Not Allowing Tds Claim Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-.

For Appellant: Shri Mihir BapatFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 244A

assessment year 2018-19. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1) The AO/CPC has erred in not allowing credit for TDS of Rs.1,18,77,593/- as claimed in the return of income and as per 26AS of Rs.1,18,77,593/-. 2) Interest u/s 244A ... Deducted at Source (TDS) of Rs.1,18,77,593/- was claimed. The above revised return was processed determining Rs.Nil income. However, the credit of TDS was not allowed by CPC which was claimed by the assessee as refund. 4. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. Addl./JCIT

DCIT(Exam), Cir-1(1), Kolkata vs. G.D. Charitable Society, Murshidabad

In the result, all the four appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 291/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

income filed by her. 2. That the Learned Assessing Officer and ADDL/JCIT(A)-NASHIK also has erred in denying the assessee the credit for TDS for the reason that there was mismatch in TDS claimed by the assessee which was in the name of the Late Jagbandhu Das (husband ... income filed by her. 2. That the Learned Assessing Officer and ADDL/JCIT(A)-1-NASHIK also has erred in denying the assessee the credit for TDS for the reason that there was mismatch in TDS claimed by the assessee which was in the name of the Late Jagbandhu Das (husband