“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

Opulent Auto Care Private Limited, Pune vs. TDS, Ward-2, Pune

ITA 1709/PUN/2025[2013-14(24Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Feb 2026

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Hon’Ble Vice-

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

Section 154Section 200ASection 220Section 234ESection 24Q

private limited company having its registered office at Pune. According to the appellant, the company was regularly deducting and depositing the tax deducted at source (TDS). However, there was certain delay in filing E-TDS returns u/s. 24Q/26Q of the Act for various quarters as set out below: Appeal ... issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing

Opulent Auto Care Private Limited, Pune vs. TDS, Ward-2, Pune

ITA 1708/PUN/2025[2013-14 (26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Feb 2026

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Hon’Ble Vice-

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

Section 154Section 200ASection 220Section 234ESection 24Q

Global Developers, Nellore vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Nellore

ITA 1683/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1683/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Global Developers, Vs. Dcit, Nellore. Circle-1, Pan: Aagfg8471R Nellore. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: None राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandi. P, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 04/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi. P, Sr. AR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

capitalized by the AO, but at the same time upheld the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of 30% of the tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.11,57,283/- which the assessee firm had failed to deposit in the Central Government account. 7. The assessee being aggrieved with ... 194J): Rs.6,000/-; and (iv) rent (under section 194I): Rs.1,55,880/-. In our view, as the assessee firm had failed to deposit tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.38,57,609/- (supra), therefore, the AO has rightly disallowed 30% of the said amount. As no material has been placed

Osg (India) Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 4925/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 144B

filed the following ground of appeal: “Matters other than transfer pricing related We have verified the two matters related to Tax deducted at source on interest. The amount of Rs.37,013 credited by Maharashtra State Distribution Company Limited was set off with electricity expenses in April 2021 and hence

Gia India Laboratory Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit/the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-14(1)(2)-Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 6801/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

For Appellant: 1:1 The Assessing Officer has erred in not properly considering and giving effec

Section 143(3)Section 234DSection 244ASection 92C

directed to grant full credit for taxes paid and to re-compute its tax liability accordingly 4:0 Re.: Short grant of tax deducted at source of Rs. 12,346/-: 4:1 The Assessing Officer has erred in granting credit for tax deducted at source short ... that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject it is entitled to full credit of tax deducted at source from its income. 4:3 The Appellant submits that the Assessing Officer be directed to grant full credit for tax deducted at source

Dishant Sureshbhai Patel, Individual vs. ITO, Ward 3(2)(6), Surat

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

ITA 473/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

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

Section 194Section 250Section 54F

meter and the DVO as per his report has taken the value @ 76 per sq. ft. The assessee has given the details of Tax Deducted at Source on sale of immovable property u/s 1941A which clearly indicates that total transaction was Rs.29,53,983 and the statement of Long Term

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Hyderbad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 2272/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

failed to allow credit of the amount of tax so deducted, and directed the AO to give credit of the amount of the tax deducted at source (TDS) before arriving at the amount of tax payable in the hands of the assessee company. Accordingly, the CIT(A) partly allowed

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 2271/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1529/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle- 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1515/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Cirle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1514/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Company Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1501/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

Karthik Lakshman, Chennai vs. Iyo, Intl Taxationward-1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2182/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2182/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2024-25

For Respondent: Ms. R.Kavitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 250

case. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the bar under sec. 205 of the Act prevents the department from demanding the tax deducted at source from the assessee who has suffered a deduction. Further, more now the liability rests with the official liquidator. Therefore, the Department ... DCIT, 132 Taxmann.com 293, wherein the Hon’ble High Court has pronounced that the Department has speculated from denying the benefit of tax deducted at source by the employer during the relevant financial years to the petitioner by relying on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case

Glen Morgan D Costa, Mumbai vs. ITO Int Tax Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 6573/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: The Learned Cit(A), The Assessee Submitted That He, Along With His Wife, Owned A Property, Each Having 50% Ownership. The Said Property Was Sold During The Relevant Financial Year For A Total Consideration Of Rs. 1 Crore & The Amount Was Credited By The Purchaser In The Joint Bank Account Of The Assessee With His Wife. The Assessee Submitted That The Tds Amounting To Rs.22,88,000/- Was Deducted By The Purchaser Under Section 194-Ia Of The Act On The Pan Of The Assessee. However, Both The Assessee & His Wife Computed Their Respective Capital Gains Tax At A 50% Share Of The Sale

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 194Section 195

section (3) of section 199 of the Act provides that the Board may, for the purpose of giving credit in respect of tax deducted at source or paid in terms of the provisions of Chapter-XVII of the Act, make such rules for the purpose of giving credit

Sophos Technologies Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

that the Ld. AO be directed to delete the impugned interest under section 234C of the Act. 4. Short grant of credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS') On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A)/Ld. AO erred in not granting ... refund the same as per the provisions of law. 10. Regarding Ground No. 4: Short grant of credit of Tax deducted at source (TDS) of Rs.5,78,321/-. The JAO is directed to verify the same and grant TDS credit as claimed in the modified return

Apurva Ashwin Desai, Mumbai vs. Addl/JCIT (A)-2, Mumbai

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

ITA 5288/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 154

assessment year 2023- 24. The grievance of the assessee lies in a narrow compass and relates solely to denial of credit of tax deducted at source, which 2 Apurva Ashwin Desai according to the assessee stands duly reflected in Form No. 26AS and is fully reconcilable with the income disclosed ... payer. 7. In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that the authorities below were not justified in denying credit of tax deducted at source to the assessee. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to grant credit of TDS amounting to Rs. 8,33,184/- in respect of rental income

Ge India Exports Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 293/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate & Ms. ViyushtiFor Respondent: Dr. KJ Divya, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 254

next issue raised by the assessee through Ground Nos. 11, 12 and 13 pertain the grant of credit for prepaid taxes, tax deducted at source and MAT credit. 32. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The grievance of the assessee is that

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ge India Export Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 253/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate & Ms. ViyushtiFor Respondent: Dr. KJ Divya, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 254

Niripraj Singh Sohal, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward 6(1) Ludhiana, Ludhiana

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

ITA 6276/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 139Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Page 6276_DEL_2025_Niripraj Singh Sohal vs ITO Ward Particulars Amount Total Tax Payable by the 8,56,794 Appellant Less: Tax deducted at source as (7,09,902) | per Form 26-AS Less: Self-assessment tax paid (60,900) on 25.01.2018 Tax paid after issuance ... tax sought to be evaded shall be the tax on the total income assessed as reduced by an amount of advance tax, tax deducted at source, tax collected at source and self-assessment tax paid before the issue of notice under section 148. 6.2 We note that in the assessee

Shree Ram Minings, Na vs. Arivs.ITO Ward-5, Navsari

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 854/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Surat23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kambleshree Ram Minings, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Jamanpada Navsari, Ward-5, Navsari-396040. Navsari. [Pan : Acrfs4648B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Rasesh Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23.01.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR

Section 250

payment was made during the year under consideration. Before us, the assessee furnished complete details of the blasting expenses along with evidence of tax deducted at source thereon. Since the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and liability had crystallized during the relevant previous year