“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

M/S. Ceva Freight Llc, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1264/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234B

case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in making and the Hon'ble DRP has erred in confirming addition of tax deducted at source ("TDS") of Rs. 69,51,134, deducted by India affiliate while making payment of administrative support fee, on account of grossing up of such ... section 234B is not applicable on facts and in law since: • The entire income of appellate, being a non-resident, was subject to tax deduction at source and tax was actually deducted by India affiliate, therefore, interest under section 234B of the Act is not applicable 4. On the facts

Kishorchandra Motilal Rajput, Bharuch vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 819/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra C. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr DR

Section 10Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 89(1)

assessee shall be 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, 84[any relief allowable under section 89,] any relief allowable under an agreement under section

Harshvadan Natvarlal Chavda, Bharuch vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 794/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra C. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr DR

Section 10Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi, Pune vs. DCIT Circle - 12, Pune

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

ITA 956/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 6Section 90

taxable in India as well as the income which is exempt as per DTAA between India and UAE and also consider the tax deducted at source appearing in Form 26AS and then give due credit of TDS. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the course of set-aside proceedings shall

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2458/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32(1)

take cognizance of the fact that these expenses are essential to the business of the Appellant. 13. Ground 13 - Short credit of tax deducted at source (TDS') On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned DCIT erred in granting credit for TDS of Rs.33 ... appeal is allowed. 58. The issue arising in ground no.13, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains to the short credit of the taxes deducted at source. Having considered the submissions of both sides, we deem it appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the AO with the direction

Chandra Sales Agency, Sikkim vs. ACIT, Circle 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 259/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 10Section 144Section 271ASection 69A

ordered in the meanwhile no coercive steps shall be taken for recovery of amount pursuant to demand notice or insist for tax deducted at source (TDS) from the person referred to in para 6(a) of the stay application. The Supreme Court further ordered on the date 14.03.2016 that interim

Alfha Coach Builders, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

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

ITA 33/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 32 & 33/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Alfha Coach Builders, The Income Tax Officer, Sf No.596’3, Andan Kovil East, Vs. Ward -1, Pudhur, Covai Road, Karur. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaofa-8970-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT

Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Finance Bill, 2015, Section 200A(1)(c) of the Act was introduced, which reads as follows: “200A. Processing of statements of tax deducted at source.— (1) ...................... (a)...................... (b)........................ (c) the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E;” 12. Further, the objects and reasons ... introduction of Section 200A(1)(c) of the Act are as follows: “Rationalisation of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS) Under Chapter XVII-B of the Act, a person is required to deduct tax on certain specified payment at the specified rate

Alfha Coach Builders, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

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

ITA 32/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT

Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Goldstar Motors, Pune vs. Assessment Unit of Income Tax Depoartment, Pune

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

ITA 33/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.33/Pun/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Gauri ManjrekarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 147Section 250

Before us, the assessee has filed the copies of profit & loss account, balance sheet and also copy of Form 26AS indicating the tax deducted at source by M/s. Hero Motorcorp Limited on the commission paid to the assessee for sale of two-wheelers vehicles and is duly supported with letter

Vishwakarma Founders (India) Private Limited, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), TDS Ward, Kolhapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1425/PUN/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1425/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Vishwakarma Founders (India) V The Income Tax Private Limited, S. Officer(Tds), F15, Midc, Shiroli, Kolhapur Kolhapur. – 416122. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaccv2246A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vaibhav R. Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastva –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-3, Kolkata Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 30.03.2025 For A.Y.2014-15, Emanating From The Order U/S.200A Of The Act, Dated 11.11.2016 & 21.11.2016. Ita No.1425/Pun/2025 For A.Y.2014-15 [A]

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 250

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 01.06.2015 were being set aside.” 5. No contrary decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has been brought to our notice. Therefore

Vishwakarma Founders (India) Private Limited, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kolhapur TDS Ward

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1405/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1405/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vishwakarma Founders (India) V The Income Tax Private Limited, S. Officer(Tds), F15, Midc, Shiroli, Kolhapur Kolhapur. – 416122. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaccv2246A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vaibhav R. Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-3, Kolkata Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 30.03.2025 For A.Y.2013-14, Emanating From The Order U/S.200A Of The Act.

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 250

The Asst. CIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2033/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR &

Section 115JSection 14ASection 50

during the relevant assessment year. This amount was duly accounted for in the books, with brokerage payments made via account payee cheques, tax deducted at source, and supported by debit notes, ledgers, agreements, and confirmations filed before the Assessing Officer. The AO, however, disallowed the brokerage expenditure, primarily ... cannot be ground of disallowance as done by the AO. The appellant is making payments through account payee cheques and has also made tax deductions at source on such payments. Under such circumstances, the disallowance made by the AO is not proper. It is a settled law that expenses incurred

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1807/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR &

Section 115JSection 14ASection 50

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 954/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: FixedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R

Section 115JSection 144Section 50

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhi Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1315/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR &

Section 115JSection 144Section 50

Aditya Birla Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax - 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4821/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar & Ms. S.Jayaram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, (CIT DR)

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 32Section 43BSection 80G

Appellant prays that the credit for TCS amounting to Rs.1,63,195/- be granted. 6. GROUND NO. VI: SHORT CREDIT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE (“TDS”) OF RS. 15,67,59,175/-: 6.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... under section 199 of the Act read with sub-rule 3(i) of Rule 37BA of the Income- tax Rules, 1962 credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government has to be allowed for the assessment year for which the underlying sum is assessable

Ravindra Sonajirao Kshirsagar, Beed vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

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

ITA 159/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.159/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Respondent: Assessee by Smt Deepa Khare

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

This being factual aspect needs to be examined at the end of ld. JAO along with Form No.26AS showing details of tax deducted at source and other prepaid taxes paid by the assessee. Ld. JAO is directed to carry out this exercise and then decide in accordance with law. Ground

Pawan Jaiswal, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, 1(3), Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 74/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Pawan Jaiswal V. The Income Tax Officer 1(3) 29/43, Ghumni Bazar Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aexpj4999Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

having being received through banking channels, copy of account, bank statement, confirmation alongwith proof of filing the return of income having being filed, tax deducted at source, the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the depositor being established and proved beyond doubt the authorities below were not justified in believing

Pinki Fresh Foods Limited, Chittoor vs. ITO., Ward-1, Chittoor

ITA 1151/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri K. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 112Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 2(14)

received by the assessee on its deposits with Canara Bank to tax, had grossly erred in not allowing the credit of the corresponding tax deduction at source (TDS) of Rs. 2,77,409/- that was disclosed in its Form 26AS. The Ld. AR, to buttress his claim that the subject ... affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee company. Also, the claim of the assessee company that the credit of the tax deducted at source (TDS) corresponding to the bank interest that had been brought to tax in its hands be also considered in the said de novo

Evroy Infraventures Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur vs. ACIT-CC-2, Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 260/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2019-20 Evroy Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. V. Acit C-48, Kalyanpur Central Circle 2 Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aadce4237F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Akshay Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.02.2024, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Kanpur – 4 (Ld. Cit(A)) For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) Was Carried Out On 17.01.2019 In Dr. M.C. Sharma, S.P.M. Hospital & Trauma Centre Group Of Cases & Also In The Case Of The Assessee’S Firm. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Infrastructure Development & Other Related Work. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 27.05.2020, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.71,940/-. During The Course Of Search & Seizure Operation

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271A

received from the party, Shri Dharmendra Kumar Gupta, all the same, it has taken full ITA No.260/LKW/2024 Page 10 of 10 credit of Tax Deducted at Source to the tune of Rs.68,800/- which again is not the correct accounting practice. The ld. CIT(A) has also given a specific