← All Phrases

“tax collected at source”

Chapter XVII - Collection & Recovery (TCS)Chapter XVII-BBChapter XVII-BB / Rule 26B / Rule 31AA / Rule 37-I305 judgments

The decision most relied on for tax collected at source is Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers v. DCIT (116 ITD 301), cited in 46 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on tax collected at source

Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers v. DCIT
116 ITD 301 · 2009 · ITAT
46
citing judgments

The case is cited for its relevance to provisions concerning Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS), particularly in relation to amendments introduced by the Finance Bill, 2012, including Section 234E.

Toyo Engg. India Ltd. v. JCIT
5 SOT 616 · 2006 · ITAT
28
citing judgments

Tax deducted at source (TDS) is a method of collection, not a levy of tax. Credit for TDS can be granted even if the corresponding income is not yet assessable, as long as the assessee follows a consistent method of accounting.

Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Eli Lilly and Company (India) Private Ltd.
15 SCC 1 · 2009 · Reported
23
citing judgments

Income tax is deductible at source under Section 4(2) and Section 192(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where a sum paid to a non-resident is chargeable to tax. These sections are part of the machinery provisions for the collection and recovery of tax.

CIT v. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd.
323 ITR 230 · 2010 · High Court
23
citing judgments

An order for default committed under Section 206C of the Income Tax Act cannot be passed after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant financial year. This limitation period is considered reasonable, similar to Section 201(3) concerning tax deduction at source.

CIT v. Kalyani Steels Ltd.
91 Taxmann.com 359 · 2018 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Tax is not deductible at source if there is no income embedded in a payment. TDS is merely an alternative method for tax collection.

CIT v. Adisankara Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd.
362 ITR 233 · 2014 · High Court
14
citing judgments

A technical breach of filing a statutory form, such as Form 27C, can be condoned. No liability under section 206C(6A) or 206C(7) can be fastened on the assessee if the statutory form is filed, even if not furnished in time.

DIT(E) v. Sri Belimatha Mahasamsthana Socio Cultural and Educational Trust
336 ITR 694 · 2012 · High Court
13
citing judgments

Denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act is not warranted if donations collected by an educational trust are not challenged by authorities and the source of corpus donations is duly proved.

ITO v. Mega Collections (p.) Ltd.
151 Taxmann.com 403 · 2023 · Reported
12
citing judgments

Loan transactions cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 if the assessee proves the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the creditors by submitting their PAN, address, income tax returns, audited financial statements, and bank statements, and also proves the source of source.

Judgments citing tax collected at source

T Srinivasa Rao&Co, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 184/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

determined after adjustment of the tax, interest and fee, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under section 89, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section

Sri Ranga Motors, Vizianagaram vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 179/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

determined after adjustment of the tax, interest and fee, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under section 89, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section

Eastern Warehouse Corporation, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 175/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

determined after adjustment of the tax, interest and fee, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under section 89, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section

Tetali Anil Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 174/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.175/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Eastern Warehouse Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aaafe3741J] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Ranga Motors Vs Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Ward-1 [Pan : Aabbfs8249P] Vizianagaram आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Tetali Anil Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-3(3) [Pan : Aaqpt9453L] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.184/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) T.Srinivasa Rao & Co. Vs. Income Tax Officer Visakhapatnam Ward-1(1) [Pan : Aamft1310Q] Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

determined after adjustment of the tax, interest and fee, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under section 89, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section

Shubham Spaces, Thane vs. CIT Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Center

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and CPC, TDS is directed to delete the demand raised under section 234E of the Act along with section 220(2) of the Act

ITA 1657/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 206CSection 220(2)Section 234E

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012.] Section - 200A, Income-tax Act, 1961 - FA, 2022 [Processing of statements

M/S. Lupin Investments Pvt. Ltd (As A Sucessor to Novamed Investments Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commisssioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1812/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br, Accountat Member & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Lupin Investments Vs. Acit, Circle – 14(1)(1) Pvt Ltd (Successor To Mumbai. Novamed Investments Pvt Ltd.,) 159, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400098. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl1070G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Hemen Chandaria.Ar Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sinha.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30.11.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 35ASection 80G

tax and interest, if any, computed under clause (b) by any M/s. Lupin Investments Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 of section GOA, or any relief allowable under section

DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3022/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

directed against the corporate tax additions/disallowances. Ground No. 11 pertains to short grant of credit of tax deducted at source and tax collected at source amounting to INR 2,06,85,052/-. Ground No. 12 pertains to short grant interest under Section 244A of the Act. In addition ... learned AO erred in not granting credit for Tax Deducted at Source 14 ITA. No. 2308 & 3022/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to Rs. 2,06,85,052. It is prayed that the learned AO be directed to grant credit

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2308/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

directed against the corporate tax additions/disallowances. Ground No. 11 pertains to short grant of credit of tax deducted at source and tax collected at source amounting to INR 2,06,85,052/-. Ground No. 12 pertains to short grant interest under Section 244A of the Act. In addition ... learned AO erred in not granting credit for Tax Deducted at Source 14 ITA. No. 2308 & 3022/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to Rs. 2,06,85,052. It is prayed that the learned AO be directed to grant credit

M/S United Spirits Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Special Range-7, Bangalore

In the result, ground 7 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3091/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.3091/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Joint Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Special Range-7 V. Bangalore. # 24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Counsel and Sri.Ankur Pai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT –DR
Section 115PSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

115P of the Act. 8. Grounds of appeal relating to short credit of 37,78,149 tax deducted at source / tax collected at source – Rs.37,78,149 9. Grounds of appeal relating to levy of 2,03,53,26,920 interest u/s 234B of the Act – Rs.203

The Congregation of the Sisters of the Cross of Chavanod, Trichy vs. CIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, the fees levied by TDS officer u/s 234E for Financial

ITA 807/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.807/Chny/2022 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2015-16) The Congregation Of The Sisters Of The The Acit, Cpc बनाम/ Cross Of Chavanod, Tds, Ghaziabad Holy Cross Provincilate, Puthur, Vs. Tiruchirappalli-620 017. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan: Aaatt-4867-G / (अपीलाथ)/Appellant) : (*+थ) / Respondent) अपीलाथ)कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None *+थ)कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 206C(3)Section 234ESection 272A(2)(k)

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 11. Similarly, Section 271H was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 providing ... section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 12. On 1.6.2015, clauses (c) to (f) came to be substituted

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 584/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B

shall be determined after adjustment of the tax and interest, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section

Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 563/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Mrs. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(C)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 154Section 234B

shall be determined after adjustment of the tax and interest, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section

M/S. Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore - 4, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 397/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

learned Assessing Officer has not disallowed the claim of expenditure of the appellant in respect of interest payment on delay in payment of tax collected at source in the assessment proceedings after Page 3 of 15 verifying the expenditures claimed by the appellant and consequently the invoking the provisions ... prejudicial to the interests of revenue so far as the issue of allowability of deduction in respect of interest on late payment of Tax Collected at Source is concerned and the twin conditions as contemplated in sec. 263 are satisfied in the present case. Consequently, the assessment order passed

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Indian Hotels Companies Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2408/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in not granting credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to Rs. 1,63,09,096. It is prayed that the learned AO be directed to grant credit ... Ground No. 11 the Assessee seeking directions for grant of credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to INR 1,63,09,096/-. The issue is remanded to the file of Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the amount

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2348/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in not granting credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to Rs. 1,63,09,096. It is prayed that the learned AO be directed to grant credit ... Ground No. 11 the Assessee seeking directions for grant of credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to INR 1,63,09,096/-. The issue is remanded to the file of Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the amount

Poonam Property Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. CPC/ITO, 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with a direction to A

ITA 552/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalpoonam Property Chs Ltd. B-2, Poonam Properties Chs Ltd. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 Pan: Aaaap2735Q ...... Appellant Vs. Cpc/Ito-22(2)(1), 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. N.R. Agarwal Respondent By : Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As (‘Cit(A)] Dated 05.11.20218 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 20,85,481/- For Which Deduction Was Claimed U/S. 80P(2)(D) For Interest Earned From Co-Op. Bank.”

For Appellant: Sh. N.R. AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 139(4)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 89

determined after adjustment of the tax [, interest and fee], if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, [any relief allowable under section 89,] any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section

Late Jayesh Thar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer TDS, Ward Kalyan, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1479/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 11.Similarly, Section 271H was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 providing ... section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 12. On 1.6.2015, clauses (c) to (f) came to be substituted

Late Jayesh Thar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer TDS, Ward Kalyan, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1478/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 11.Similarly, Section 271H was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 providing ... section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 12. On 1.6.2015, clauses (c) to (f) came to be substituted

Late Shri Jayesh Thar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer TDS, Ward Kalyan, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1477/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 11.Similarly, Section 271H was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 providing ... section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 12. On 1.6.2015, clauses (c) to (f) came to be substituted

Late Shri Jayeesh Thar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward Kalyan, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1476/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 11.Similarly, Section 271H was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 providing ... section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 12. On 1.6.2015, clauses (c) to (f) came to be substituted