“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

DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3022/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

whereas Ground No. 8 to 10 are directed against the corporate tax additions/disallowances. Ground No. 11 pertains to short grant of credit of tax deducted at source and tax collected at source amounting to INR 2,06,85,052/-. Ground No. 12 pertains to short grant interest under Section 244A ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in not granting credit for Tax Deducted at Source 14 ITA. No. 2308 & 3022/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS) amounting to Rs. 2,06,85,052. It is prayed

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2308/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

Shell Informaation Technology International Bv, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 996/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 2(24)Section 234BSection 270A

fact that receipts towards IT support services are not for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience; Short granting of credit for Tax Deducted at source (TDS) 7. Erred in not granting the TDS credit of Rs. 69,67,972. Interest under section 234B of the Act 8. Erred

Sri Srinivasa Vinay Babu, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1662/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Srinivasa Vinay Babu Vs Income Tax Officer-2(2)(2) No. 927/17, 18Th A Main Road 1St Floor, Bmtc Building 5Th Block, Rajaji Nagar 80 Feet Road, Koramangala Bengaluru 560095 Bangalore 560010 Pan – Azups7151D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 40

details and allow the actual expenses incurred in accordance with laws. The assessee is directed to submit the relevant details pertaining to the tax deducted at source and cooperate with the proceedings. It is ordered accordingly. 11. The last issue is with regard to the deduction claimed as amount

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

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 199/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

amount, inter-alia, includes electrical goods, hardware tools, dry ice, IT Pro expense, gases etc. being revenue in nature. 14. Short credit of tax deducted at source The learned AO erred in giving credit of tax deducted at source of INR 58,175,493 instead ... itself and the importing of such disallowances into the scope of adjustment of book profit is not permissible. 10. Short credit of tax deducted at source The learned AO erred in giving credit of tax deducted at, source of INR 6,27,13,539 instead

M/S Praxair India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 3336/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

M/S United Spirits Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Special Range-7, Bangalore

In the result, ground 7 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3091/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.3091/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Joint Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Special Range-7 V. Bangalore. # 24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Counsel and Sri.Ankur Pai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT –DR

Section 115PSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

interest of Rs.15,43,41,791 u/s 115P of the Act. 8. Grounds of appeal relating to short credit of 37,78,149 tax deducted at source / tax collected at source – Rs.37,78,149 9. Grounds of appeal relating to levy of 2,03,53,26,920 interest u/s 234B

United Arab Shipping Company Ltd.(Formerly Known As United Arab Shipping Company (S.A.G)), Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)- 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2254/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2022AY 2018-2019

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 234DSection 270ASection 90(2)

profits could be attributed to such PE since the Appellant has remunerated UASAC India on an arm's length basis. Short grant of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) credit of INR 8,68,889/- appearing in Form 26AS of UASC SAG and UASAC 7. erred in not granting TDS credit ... return of income for AY 2018-19, hence, the direction may be issued to the AO to grant credit for Tax Deducted at Source ('TDS'). 6.2. Pursuant to the submissions made together with the additional evidences filed by the assessee before the ld. DRP, the ld. DRP sought

Ronak Gems Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4604/MUM/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156

section 142,— (i) if any tax or interest is found due on the basis of such return, after adjustment of any tax deducted at source, any advance tax paid, any tax paid on self-assessment and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest, then, without prejudice

Praxair India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 200/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri T. Suryanarayana

Section 92C

itself and the importing of such disallowances into the scope of adjustment of book profit is not permissible. 9. Short credit of tax deducted at source The learned AO erred in giving credit of tax deducted at source of INR 77,61,556 instead ... this ground raised by assessee stands allowed. 8. Ground no. 9 is in respect of the direction sought for granting the credit of tax deducted at source. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessing officer has given a short credit of TDS of Rs.77,61,556/- instead of Rs.585

M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 932/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.844/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Joint Vs. M/S.Dell International Services India Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), No.12/1, 12/2A, 13/1A, Divyashree Gardens, Challagutta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.932/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Dell International Services Vs. The Joint Commissioner India Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 143(2)Section 92C

cannot be allowed as deduction. The relevant observations of the Tribunal are as follows:- "21. As far as delay in remittance of tax deducted at source u/s. 201(1A) of the Act is concerned, we find that the Hon'ble Madras High Court in IT(TP)A Nos.844 & 932/Bang/2017 Page ... Madras High Court & uphold the order of the CIT(A) insofar as it relates to disallowance of interest on delayed remittance of tax deducted at source u/s. 201(1A) of the Act." 75. Following the above decision of the Tribunal, we hold that interest on delayed payment

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 844/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 143(2)Section 92C

M/S United Breweries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

erred in not adjudicating on the ground raised by the assessee that the learned AO erred in not granting credit for tax deducted at source as claimed by the assessee in its return of income 9. Grounds related to demand of Dividend Distribution Tax 9.1 The learned ... made in the books of accounts according to the assessee, the amount of Rs.28,79,89,551 did not require tax deduction at source. The tax was not deducted on the balance amount of Rs.7,34,77,951, since according to the assessee, the payees were not identifiable. The assessee

M/S. Icici Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer (International Tax Ward)2(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1511/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(4)Section 204Section 49

also learned CIT(A) have proceeded on the basis that the recipient has paid advance tax liability which is equivalent to the tax deducted at source. The Assessing Officer has even observed that as the payment is made on ITNS 280, which is appliable for taxes on income- unlike ITNS ... income taking into consideration the profit/income earned on transaction.”. That legal proposition, however, is not correct. It is well settled in law that tax deduction at source liability under section 201 is a vicarious liability of the payer of an income, which cannot come into play only when the primary

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 2(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7287/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

nature of revenue expenditure allowable under section 971) other appropriate provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 15. Credit for Tax deducted at Source is not given A) In respect of TDS-Rs. 2.38.16.303/–: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ACIT/DRP erred in giving lower

ACIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2758/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

260/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd., section 199 will have to be harmoniously and pragmatically read as providing for allowing credit for tax deducted at source in the year of receipt of amount, in which the tax was deducted at source. 16. It was submitted that as regards the advance against ... chargeable to tax, command of section 199 will have to be harmoniously and pragmatically read as providing for allowing credit for tax deducted at source in the year of receipt of amount, in which the tax was deducted at source. 33. In respect of advance against work and material

ACIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2757/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

M/S Bellary Nirmithi Kendra, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2367/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Mallaharao, Advocate

Section 37Section 40Section 43B

payments had been made by the Appellant to the service provider to justify to cast the obligation upon the Appellant for the tax deducted at source. 6. The learned CIT (A) ought to have considered the payments made towards labour cess and third party payments of royalty

M/S Bellary Nirmithi Kendra, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2366/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Mallaharao, Advocate

Section 37Section 40Section 43B

Bsr Infratech India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 697/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, D.R

Section 199Section 234ASection 270ASection 43Section 43C

12.The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in accordance with Rule 37BA of the Income tax 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 BSR Infratech India Ltd., Bangalore ... some bonafide reason. The assessee could not have followed hybrid method for recognition of its income. • The assessee had claimed full credit of tax deducted at source (TDS) on the retention money during the year under consideration without offering the income itself to tax. • As per 'Statement of Significant Accounting