“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

Olive Bar and Kitchen Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 13(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5924/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriolive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-13(1)(1), बनाम Ltd. Mumbai 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Maharashtra-400020 Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Dcit, Circle-13(1)(2), V/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Mumbai बनाम Ltd. R. No. 218, Aayakar 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Bhavan, M K Road, Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Maharashtra-400020 Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pmnani

Section 250Section 35D(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(lit)Section 37(1)

payable by SUSSEGADO, accruing and relating to the operations of the Demerged Undertaking from the Appointed Date onwards, including all advance tax payments, tax deducted at source, any refund and claims shall, for all purposes, be treated as advance tax payments, tax deducted at source or refunds and claims ... Scheme becoming effective SUSSEGADO is expressly permitted to revise, and OLIVE BAR is expressly permitted to file their respective income tax returns, including tax deducted at source certificates, sales tax/ value added tax returns, excise returns, service tax returns and other tax returns for the period commencing on and from

Krishibhavan Andhoor, Kannur University Campus vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Aayakar Bhawan

Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

ITA 749/COCH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 233Section 234ESection 273B

234E of the Act. The provisions of section 200(3) of the Act require a person to deliver a statement of tax deducted at source within the period specified therein. If the statement is not furnished within the due date, late fee on the tax deductible at source is charged

Krishibhavan Andhoor, Kannur University Campus vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Aaykar Bhawan

Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

ITA 748/COCH/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 233Section 234ESection 273B

Krishibhavan Andhoor, Kannur University Campus vs. DCIT, CPC - TDS, Aaykar Bhawan

Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

ITA 747/COCH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 233Section 234ESection 273B

Krishibhavan Andhoor, Kannur University Campus vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Aayakar Bhawan

Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

ITA 746/COCH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 233Section 234ESection 273B

Krishibhavan Andhoor, Kannur University Campus vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kannothumchal

Accordingly, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

ITA 723/COCH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 233Section 234ESection 273B

Jil Information Technology Limited, New Delhi vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

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

ITA 539/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

Learned D.R. for Revenue expressed no objection to this. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to give credit to the assessee for tax deducted at source in accordance with law. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 21/01/2025

Navnath Duryodhan Golande, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5567/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Navnath Duryodhan Golande, Ito Ward 1(1) H.No. 1005, Shree Krishna Hsg. Soc. Mohan Plaza, Khadakpada, Kalyan Vs. Subhash Nagar, Kalyan Road, (West)-421301. Bhiwandi-421302. Na Kulkarni (Advocate) Wadal Bldg., Near Dns Bank Manpada Road, Dombivali (East)-421201. Pan No. Aiwpg 8278 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pravin Salukhe, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

short ‘the Act’) was passed tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was passed. In said order, credit of certain credit of certain tax deducted at source( ed at source(TDS) and tax collected at source(TCS TCS) was not granted to the assessee. Therefore, was not granted

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Canara Bank, Bengaluru

ITA 222/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Sri Abrarana &Anantham, A.Rs

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)

Disallowance of Provision for Bad & Doubtful Debt U/s 36(1)(viia) 1569,59,38,804 10. Short Allowance of Tax Deducted at Source. 15,10,41,394 11. Short Allowance of Tax Paid by Overseas Branch u/s 90/91 7,17,62,335 12. Applicability of Provisions of MAT u/s 115JB

Canara Bank, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore, Bengaluru

ITA 1154/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Abarana &Anantham, A.RsFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 38(1)

shares of CanFin Home Ltd. 9. Disallowance of Provision for Bad & Doubtful Debt u/s 36(1)(viia) (viiu) 10. Short Allowance of Tax Deducted at Source 11. Short Allowance of Tax Paid by Overseas Branch u/s 90/91 12. Applicability of Provisions of MAT u/s 115JB TOTAL

Shree Kuberji Developers, Surat vs. ACIT Cicle-3(2), New Circle -1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1075/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Biayananda Prusethbeareht Aat S./Ita No.1075/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing)

should reduce the said rental income from the income of AY.2017-18. As per Rule 37BA(3) of IT Rules, 1962, 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. The AO should, therefore, withdraw

Saurya Urja Company of Rajasthan Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 965/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

erred in not providing proper directions to the Assessing officer in relation to the credit of tax deducted at source as appearing in Form 26AS of the assessee company, specifically in relation to the interest earned by the assessee company from HDFC Bank Ltd. On local area development charges collected ... assessee company, even though it was clearly explained that the assessee company was entitled for claiming the entire such credit of tax deducted at source. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by providing

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(4), Mohali

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 334/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

without there being an indication if the refund application has been finally rejected. By merely recording that in his opinion, no credit for tax deducted at source is to be allowed, the Income-tax Officer cannot be said to have closed the proceedings finally. The decisions referred

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Mohali

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 282/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for

ITA 451/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.451/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela 3337, Nr. Palaiya Mahakali Mandir Pethapur, Gandhinagar Gandhinagar – 382 610 बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-3 Gandhinagar स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afepv 3269 D (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 15/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 19/01/2024, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Which Upheld The Order Of The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao"] Dated 30/12/2019, Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"].

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Gujarat High Court held that interest on compensation awarded for land acquisition forms part of the compensation and is not subject to Tax Deducted at Source (TDS). • Circular from Revenue Department of Gujarat State: The assessee furnished a copy of the circular issued by the Gujarat Revenue Department, which directed

Flemingo Liners Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Wqard-15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6176/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(7)Section 234B

Learned CIT(A) further erred in confirming the finding of the Learned Assessing Officer for rejecting the application for giving credits of the tax deducted at source and issue a refund on account of more taxes paid. 3. The Learned CIT(A) further erred in confirming the finding ... after earlier assessment is set aside or nullified, tax /deposited by an assessee by way of advance tax or self-assessment tax, of tax deducted at source is liable to be refunded to assessee, since its retention by revenue would result in breach of article 265 of Constitution which prohibits

Shri Nirmal Rajendra Jagetiya, Jamnagar vs. The ITO (TDS-3), Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(3)Section 206C(5)Section 234E

provided in that Section. For the purpose of convenience, we are reproducing the provisions of Section 200A: "200A (1) Where a statement of tax deduction at source or a correction statement has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter referred to in this Section as deductor) under Section ... there was no enabling provision in Section 200A for making adjustment in respect of the statement filed by the assessee with regard to tax deducted at source by levying fee under Section 234E. The Parliament for the first time enabled the AO to make adjustment by levying fee under Section

Ravina Nishant Bhojwani, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax CPC Banglore, Mumbai

The appeal is allowed’

ITA 2638/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath

Section 143(1)Section 250

Return of Income filed by the Appellant. 2. The CIT(A) erred confirming the action of AO in not giving credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of Rs.15,62,722/- while computing the income u/s.143(1) of the I.T. Act. The Appellant submits that she has duly accounted ... 28/10/2022. While the no variation was made in the returned income, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) did not grant credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) aggregating to INR.15,62,722/- on the ground that the same was not reflected in Form 26AS of the Assessee. Accordingly, a demand

Mula Parisar Serva Seva Sangh, Sonai vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Nsk, Nashik

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

ITA 632/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.632/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mula Parisar Serva Seva Vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Sangh, Nashik. At Post- Sonal, Tal.- Newasa, Dist.- Ahmednagar- 414105. Pan : Aaatm7100K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mihir Bapat Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Coimbatore For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Allowing Credit For Tds Of Rs.1,18,77,593/- As Claimed In The Return Of Income & As Per 26As Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-. 2) Interest U/S 244A On Refund – Not Grated By A.O. 3) Ao/Cpc Has Erred In Not Providing Any Reasons In Not Allowing Tds Claim Of Rs.1,18,77,593/-.

For Appellant: Shri Mihir BapatFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 244A

194C of the IT Act. The assessee trust has furnished its revised return of income on 30.03.2019 declaring NIL income, although refund of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of Rs.1,18,77,593/- was claimed. The above revised return was processed determining Rs.Nil income. However, the credit ... assessee that in all the above assessment orders, the Department has accepted this procedure and only made the addition of income tax deducted at source as income of the assessee and no other addition was made by the Department. Accordingly, Ld. AR submitted before the bench that Ld. Addl./JCIT

DCIT(Exam), Cir-1(1), Kolkata vs. G.D. Charitable Society, Murshidabad

In the result, all the four appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 291/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

source is assessable in the 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 ... deduction of tax referred to in sub-rule (1) and shall keep the declaration in his safe custody. (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