← All Phrases

“tax deducted at source”

Chapter XVII - Collection & Recovery (TDS)Chapter XVII-BChapter XVII-B / Rule 26B / Rule 37BA(2)2,249 judgments

The decision most relied on for tax deducted at source is GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 456), cited in 663 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on tax deducted at source

GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 456 · 2010 · Supreme Court
663
citing judgments

Tax must be deducted at source from payments made to a non-resident under Section 195 only if such payment is chargeable to tax in India. The Assessing Officer bears the onus to establish that the payments made are indeed chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

CIT v. Samsung Electronics Ltd.
345 ITR 494 · 2012 · High Court
461
citing judgments

Payments by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for software are considered royalty, constituting income deemed to accrue in India under section 9(1)(v), thereby requiring tax deduction at source under section 195.

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.
377 ITR 635 · 2015 · High Court
369
citing judgments

The second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, is curative and applies retrospectively from April 1, 2005. Consequently, if the recipient of a payment has filed their return and paid taxes on the amount from which tax was not deducted at source, the payer's expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia).

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh v. CIT
239 ITR 587 · 1999 · Supreme Court
243
citing judgments

The Supreme Court lays down principles for deducting tax at source (TDS) under Section 195 on payments to non-residents, including aspects of income deemed taxable in India and the application of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) under Section 90.

PCIT v. Peroorkada Service Co-op. Bank Ltd.
442 ITR 141 · 2022 · High Court
208
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative society from deposits with other co-operative banks, such as district or state co-operative banks, is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, as it is considered income from other sources.

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.

CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd.
61 Taxmann.com 45 · 2015 · High Court
177
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) cannot be made when the assessee has deducted tax at a lesser rate, as opposed to no deduction. The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is applicable retrospectively, mitigating disallowance where tax is deposited by the recipient.

Judgments citing tax deducted at source

Thomas Abraham, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Circle-1(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 390/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

present appeals are in respect of levy of interest u/s. 234E for filing TDS returns belatedly. 2.1 The Assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.26Q for different quarterly years in FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (relevant ... return of TDS filed u/s.200(3) of the Act has to be processed and it reads as follows:- “Processing of statements of tax deducted at source. 200A. (1) Where a statement of tax deduction at source or a correction statement has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter

Thomas Abraham, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Circle-1(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 389/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

present appeals are in respect of levy of interest u/s. 234E for filing TDS returns belatedly. 2.1 The Assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.26Q for different quarterly years in FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (relevant ... return of TDS filed u/s.200(3) of the Act has to be processed and it reads as follows:- “Processing of statements of tax deducted at source. 200A. (1) Where a statement of tax deduction at source or a correction statement has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter

Thomas Abraham, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Circle-1(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 388/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

present appeals are in respect of levy of interest u/s. 234E for filing TDS returns belatedly. 2.1 The Assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.26Q for different quarterly years in FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (relevant ... return of TDS filed u/s.200(3) of the Act has to be processed and it reads as follows:- “Processing of statements of tax deducted at source. 200A. (1) Where a statement of tax deduction at source or a correction statement has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter

Thomas Abraham, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Circle-1(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 387/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

present appeals are in respect of levy of interest u/s. 234E for filing TDS returns belatedly. 2.1 The Assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.26Q for different quarterly years in FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (relevant ... return of TDS filed u/s.200(3) of the Act has to be processed and it reads as follows:- “Processing of statements of tax deducted at source. 200A. (1) Where a statement of tax deduction at source or a correction statement has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter

Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft, Mumbai vs. The DCIT 2(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above directions

ITA 659/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blehapag-Llyod Aktiengesellschaft V. Dcit – 2(2)(2) C/O Hapag-Lloyd India Pvt. Ltd., Air India Building 501, Satellite Gazebo, B-Wing Nariman Point 5Th Floor, Curu Hargovindji Marg Mumbai – 400 021 Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 Pan: Aaach0979G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved Department By : Ms. Bharati Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Ms. Bharati Singh
Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

assessee also raised an additional ground of objection and also submitted additional evidence with respect for claiming tax credit of tax deducted at sources in the name of the subsidiary Indian Company. The learned DRP after obtaining the remand report of the Assessing Officer and rejoinder of the assessee thereon ... remunerated HLIPL on an arm's length basis in terms of Article 5(6) of the DTAA. 3. Non-granting of credit for Taxes Deducted at Source (TDS) amounting to Rs. 54,89,753/ 3.1 The learned Assessing Officer/DRP has erred in not granting credit for TDS to the extent

Shri Bhanumurthy Venkata Ranga Satya Tirumalasetty, Mumbai vs. DCIT Centralised Processing Cell -TDS, Mumbai

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

ITA 1498/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Bhanu Murthy Venkata Ranga Dcit Centralized Processing Satya Tirumalasetty, Cell-Tds, Flat No. 1504, Valentine Tower, Vs. Cpc, Aayakar Bhavan, Sector-3, Pimpri Pada, Film City Road, Vaishali, Malad (West), Gaziabad, U.P.-201010. Mumbai-400097. Pan No. Abdpt 7966 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. K. Gopal, Adv./For Respondent: Mrs. Smita Nair, DR
Section 195Section 197Section 200A

tax deducted at taken by the deductor for the purpose of tax deducted at taken by the deductor for the purpose of tax deducted at source. On this ground also there is no liability for chargin source. On this ground also there is no liability for chargin source. On this

Dhananjay G. Mishra, Mumbai vs. CIT Appeal NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 477/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.477/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17) Dhananjay G. Mishra बिधम/ Acit, Circle-20(1) Prop. Yeoman Marine Piramal Chambers, Vs. Services (Yms) Lalbaugh, Mumbai. W-1402, World Crest, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, The World Towers Delisle Road, Mumbai-400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aflpm1475K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satish Mody Revenue By: Shri Mahiita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(A) (Nfac), Delhi Dated 20.12.2021 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Not Allowing The Credit Of Tds Of Rs.24,41,710/-. 3. Brief Facts Pertaining To The Issue Is That Assessee Is An Individual Having A Proprietary Concern Running In The Name Of Yeoman Marine Services ( Herein After In Short ‘Yms’) Which Was Succeeded By A Private Limited Company Yeoman Marine Services Private Limited (Herein After In Short ‘Ymspl’) W.E.F. 01.11.2015. Appellant Is A Contractor In Ship Repairing Business. During The Year The Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModyFor Respondent: Shri Mahiita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 194CSection 199

well as under Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rule, 1961 (hereinafter “the Rule”) which governed the credit for tax deduction at source for the 3 A.Y. 2016-17 Dhananjay G. Mishra purpose of Section 199 of the Act, which according to assessee provides that the credit of TDS will ... Dhananjay G. Mishra hands of a person other than the deductee, credit for the whole or any part of the tax deducted at source, as the case may be, shall be given to the other person and not to the deductee: Provided that the deductee files a declaration with

M/S. Nike India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.202/Bang/2021 Assessment Year :2015-16 M/S. Nike India Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Ground & First Floor, Circle – 3(1)(1), Olympia Building, No.66/1, Bagmane Tech Bengaluru. Park, C. V. Raman Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aabcn 9612 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Susan Dolores George, Cit(Osd)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan Dolores George, CIT(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144(3)Section 92C

Learned AO / Learned TPO / Hon'ble DRP erred in not taking cognizance of the Form 16 submitted by the Appellant detailing the Tax Deducted at Source deducted on such salary payments to expatriates. Further, Learned TPO erred in placing reliance on Hon'ble Bangalore Tribunal's order

DCIT - 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. V. Hotels Ltd.(Formerly Known As Tulip Hospitality Services Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5664/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
Section 32(1)(ii)

relates to the disallowance of claim made u/s 40(a) of the Act on the ground of deduction/payment of tax deducted at source. 20. In AY 204-15, the assessee had claimed deduction of certain expenses as admissible u/s 40(a) of the Act. The AO noticed that the amount

DCIT - 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. V. Hotels Ltd.(Formerly Known As Tulip Hospitality Services Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5663/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2013-14
Section 32(1)(ii)

relates to the disallowance of claim made u/s 40(a) of the Act on the ground of deduction/payment of tax deducted at source. 20. In AY 204-15, the assessee had claimed deduction of certain expenses as admissible u/s 40(a) of the Act. The AO noticed that the amount

DCIT - 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. V. Hotels Ltd.(Formerly Known As Tulip Hospitality Services Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5662/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
Section 32(1)(ii)

relates to the disallowance of claim made u/s 40(a) of the Act on the ground of deduction/payment of tax deducted at source. 20. In AY 204-15, the assessee had claimed deduction of certain expenses as admissible u/s 40(a) of the Act. The AO noticed that the amount

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 483/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 482/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 481/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 480/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 479/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 478/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 477/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 476/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved

Mindlogicx Infratec Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all these appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 475/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Hemanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Narayana. K. R, Addl. DIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. 2. The assessee filed statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) for various quarters in Form No.24Q for FY 2012-13 to 2014-15 (AY 2013-14 to 2015-16). The statement was processed ... section 200 or the proviso to sub-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.” 3. Aggrieved