← 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

Garrison Emgomeer (E/M), Air Firce Station, Maharajpur vs. JCIT.(TDS), Bhopal

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 129/AGR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

under Ministry of Defence. The appellant had made various payments during financial year 2012-13 relevant to assessment year 2013- 14 subjected to Tax Deduction at source, it had deducted tax at source from payments made liable for TDS and deposited the same amount to the credit of the Central ... passing the orders afresh after considering the submissions of assessee. We direct the assessee to file submissions and all the details of the tax deducted at source and its deposits to the credit of Central Govt. for all the four quarters, as desired under the Act. Needless to say, that

Garrison Emgomeer (E/M) Air Force Station, Maharajpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS), Bhopal

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 128/AGR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

under Ministry of Defence. The appellant had made various payments during financial year 2012-13 relevant to assessment year 2013- 14 subjected to Tax Deduction at source, it had deducted tax at source from payments made liable for TDS and deposited the same amount to the credit of the Central ... passing the orders afresh after considering the submissions of assessee. We direct the assessee to file submissions and all the details of the tax deducted at source and its deposits to the credit of Central Govt. for all the four quarters, as desired under the Act. Needless to say, that

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 Udaipur, Udaipur vs. Ravi Infrabuild Projects Limited, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 786/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur30 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar Gehlot, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 199(1)Section 250

assessment year and not in the AY under consideration. It is worthwhile to mention that Rule 37BA(3)(i) which says:- “Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable.” 3. Briefly, the facts

District Co-Opertive Sugar Cane Supply Ltd., Bareilly vs. ITO Range-1(1), Bareilly

In the result, in the combined result in ITA

ITA 578/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P

observed that as per Form 26AS, the assessee had earned commission at Rs.1,13,49,264/- and claimed credit of tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.11,34,972/- on such commission income but the assessee had offered for taxes a sum of Rs.60,79,500/- and balance commission

District Co-Opertive Sugar Cane Supply Ltd, Bareilly vs. ITO Range-1(2), Bareilly

ITA 577/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P

observed that as per Form 26AS, the assessee had earned commission at Rs.1,13,49,264/- and claimed credit of tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.11,34,972/- on such commission income but the assessee had offered for taxes a sum of Rs.60,79,500/- and balance commission

Satinder Paul Through L/H Neelam Saini, Pinjore vs. Income Tax Officer, Panchkula

In the result, the ground no

ITA 136/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

other hand the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the income-tax department must be directed to grant credit for tax deducted at source in accordance with law. 3. Difference of Gratuity compensation at 2007 and 1997 scales amounting to Rs.3,32,271/- (Rs.9,10,560/- - Rs.5 ... terms as indicated in the order dated 20.09.2023 (supra) of the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer is also directed to give credit of tax deducted at source in ITA 136/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2017-18 23 accordance with law. The findings and directions as contained in ITA No.83/CHD/2023 shall apply mutatis-mutandis

Nalini Tukaram Nikam, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Pune

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

ITA 2747/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2747/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

also claimed similar deduction u/s.57(iii) of the Act at Rs.48,08,119/- and also the assessee has not claimed the tax deducted at source on the said interest income. Reason for the same was stated that assessee was entitled to get interest on Escrow account only till the date ... undisputedly credited in the account of the assessee by bank on the Fixed Deposits held in the name of the assessee and due taxes deducted at source. Ld. Counsel for the assessee failed to controvert the findings of ld.CIT(A) that upon termination or 14 Nalini Tukaram Nikam cancellation

Ravi Yantriki Udyog Private Limited, Pune vs. ITO Ward (5)(4), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1588/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 194C

receipts are offered for taxation on receipt of the same. This is not the case so. Further, the assessee is claiming the tax deducted at source of Rs. 2,27,080/- in respect of contractual receipts from M/s. Vanshika Sugar and Power Industries Ltd in its return of income filed

Fairbridge Capital Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai - 6, Mumbai, Maharashtra

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3626/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Ms. Chandni Shah a/w Mr. Hardik Nirmal andFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT, D/R [virtually
Section 143(3)Section 263

issued its own shares and not the shares of the holding company. 3. Lastly, the captioned notice states that the details of tax deducted at source on share-based payments to FFHL are not furnished by the Company. In response to each of the above points, the Company submits

Anuj Choudhary, Bhopal vs. It0, 1(1), Bhopal

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

ITA 204/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Paresh M Joshianuj Choudhary, Income Tax Officer 1(1), Mig 184, Bhopal Geetanjali Complex, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aqepc6217D Assessee By Shri Balaji.V, Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit-Dr With Shri Nihar Sahu Date Of Hearing 22.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.10.2025 O R D E R

Section 143(1)Section 192Section 90

various grounds of appeal mentioned in Form No.36 stated that the sole grievance is that the revenue authorities failed to grant credit of tax deducted at source of Rs.15,63,708/-. He submitted that the issue may please be restored to the file of jurisdictional Assessing Officer to examine ... claim of short tax deducted at source of Rs.15,63,708/-. 3. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of lower authorities. 4. We have heard rival contentions and records place on record before us. The only grievance of the assessee is that against the tax deducted

Assam Gas Company Limited, Duliajan vs. DCIT/ ACIT, Circle 1/Dbr, Dibrugarh

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/GTY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 438Section 43B

made. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is rejected. 4.3 Ground 3: Disallowance of TDS Credit 4.3.1 The appellant has challenged the disallowance of Tax Deducted at Source I.T.A. No. 66/GTY/2025 Assam Gas Company Limited (TDS) credit amounting to Rs. 4.98,09,173. The appellant claims that the TDS credit

Altera Digital Health (India) LLP (Formerly Known As Allscripts (India) LLP), Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, Ground Number 11 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 359/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 92C(1)

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in granting a lesser credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS') of INR 51,842 instead of INR 63,086 as claimed by the Appellant in the return of income. The Appellant prays that

Divesh Verma, Bengaluru vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Faridabad

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

ITA 5961/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Divesh Verma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C-804, Veracious Vani Vilas Ward-1(1), Apartments, Doddaballapur Faridabad Main Road, Yelahanka, (Haryana) Bengalure-560064, Karnataka Pan: Aehpv6594H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Balaja V, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) has erred in not directing the Ld. JAO to allow credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of Rs. 19,53,556 as claimed in the Return of Income and also reflected in Form 26AS as against TDS credit

Supreme Transport Company, Indore vs. ITO TDS-II, Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 917/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

provisions of the I.T Act. The rationale for such amendments in TDS/TCS related provisions have been provided under the heading "E. Rationalization of Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS) Provisions " which comprise of 6 paras. Para (III) relates to insertion of section 234E ... were for computation and intimation for payment of fees under section 234E of the Act as they relate for the period of tax deducted at source prior to 1-6-2015 were being set aside. 15. In other words, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka explained the position

Supreme Transport Company, Indore vs. ITO TDS-II, Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 914/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

provisions of the I.T Act. The rationale for such amendments in TDS/TCS related provisions have been provided under the heading "E. Rationalization of Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS) Provisions " which comprise of 6 paras. Para (III) relates to insertion of section 234E ... were for computation and intimation for payment of fees under section 234E of the Act as they relate for the period of tax deducted at source prior to 1-6-2015 were being set aside. 15. In other words, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka explained the position

State Bank of Hyderabad ( Presently Merged With Sbi), Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Vijayawada

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bank are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 383/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 382 & 383/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) State Bank Of Hyderabad Vs. The Income Tax Officer (Presently Merged With (Tds), State Bank Of India), Tds Ward-1, South Central Railway Vijayawada. Branch, Near Railway Station, Vijayawada- 520001. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Smt. Venkata Suseela, Advocate (For Sri M.V. Prasad, Ca) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Smt. Venkata SuseelaFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 192Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

stated, the assessee-bank was subjected to an inspection on 20/08/2015, to verify the reasons for the drastic decrease in the remittances of tax deducted at Source (TDS) by the assessee-bank for the subject year i.e., AY 2014-15 as compared to that of the preceding years. 4. During ... minus) Rs. 51,42,720] was for the reason that he had reduced the said amount by the amount of tax deducted at source (TDS) that it had claimed to have regularly remitted during the year in respect of the aforesaid payments, i.e., salary and interest payment, but we were

State Bank of Hyderabad (Presently Merged With Sbi), Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Vijayawada

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bank are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 382/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 382 & 383/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) State Bank Of Hyderabad Vs. The Income Tax Officer (Presently Merged With (Tds), State Bank Of India), Tds Ward-1, South Central Railway Vijayawada. Branch, Near Railway Station, Vijayawada- 520001. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Smt. Venkata Suseela, Advocate (For Sri M.V. Prasad, Ca) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Smt. Venkata SuseelaFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 192Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

stated, the assessee-bank was subjected to an inspection on 20/08/2015, to verify the reasons for the drastic decrease in the remittances of tax deducted at Source (TDS) by the assessee-bank for the subject year i.e., AY 2014-15 as compared to that of the preceding years. 4. During ... minus) Rs. 51,42,720] was for the reason that he had reduced the said amount by the amount of tax deducted at source (TDS) that it had claimed to have regularly remitted during the year in respect of the aforesaid payments, i.e., salary and interest payment, but we were

Incometax Officer, Ward-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Surendra Nath Gubbala, Visakhapatnam

ITA 482/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 48

paid to the assessee, out of which 6 ITA No.482/Viz/2024 & CO No.03/Viz/2025 Surendra Nath Gubbala advance tax and tax deducted at source (TDS) were deposited, and only the balance amount of Rs. 28,41,320/- was received in his bank account. 4. The A.O observed, that the assessee while computing

Surbhi Anand, South Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2023-24] Surbhi Anand, Acit, C-155, Basement, Lajpat Circle-1(1)(1), Nagar-2, South Delhi, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Sanjay Place, Delhi-110024 Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282002 Pan-Acypa6580B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, Ca Respondent By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 Order, Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 145Section 154Section 193

Bonds issued by the Reserve Bank of India, credited the proceeds including interest of Rs. 2,40,40,000 on maturity and deducted Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) u/s 193 of the I.T. Act, 1961 of Rs. 24,04,000 thereon, which was reported by SHCIL in the Annual Tax ... regard, the Rule 37BA(3) of the Income Tax Rules 1962, is reproduced as under: 11 Surbhi Anand “ 37BA. …… (3) (i) Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government, shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable. (ii) Where tax

Achala Punja, Teynampet vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1483/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. R. M. Narayanan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. C.I.T
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54

observed that the total consideration mentioned therein for the purchase of the property was Rs.3,01,77,700/-, on which Tax Deducted at Source u/s.194-IA of the Act amounting to Rs.3,01,777/- had been duly deposited. The AO further noted that the assessee had incurred registration charges and stamp