“Section 201(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 201Section 201(1)1,701 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 201(1) is Kourani v. Union OF India (83 Taxmann.com 137), cited in 1,708 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 201(1)

Kourani v. Union OF India

83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court

1,708

citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

Fateh Raj Singhvi & Ors. v. UOI

289 CTR 602 · 2016 · High Court

844

citing judgments

A fee under Section 234E cannot be levied or adjusted in an intimation under Section 200A for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the enabling amendment to Section 200A(1)(c) came into effect only from that date.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India

54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court

702

citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

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.

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

293 ITR 226 · 2007 · Supreme Court

576

citing judgments

The deductor cannot be treated as an assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) if the deductee has already paid the tax or offered the impugned receipts in their return of income. However, interest under Section 201(1A) for delayed deposit of tax can still be levied up to the date of filing of the return of income by the deductee.

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.

Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India

63 Taxmann.com 243 · 2015 · High Court

397

citing judgments

The imposition of fees for late filing of TDS/TCS returns prior to the Finance Act, 2015 amendments was not illegal, and the Rajasthan High Court found no justification to interfere with such compensatory fees.

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).

Judgments citing Section 201(1)

Kad Steel Rolling Mills, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, TDS, Ashram Road

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

ITA 652/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR

Section 119(2)(b)Section 201Section 201(1)

Asst. Year –2013-14 - 2– 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (TDS) initiated proceedings under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) on the assessee based on information received from ITO, Ward 3(2)(9), Ahmedabad. During ... could not be exempted from the obligation to deduct tax at source, and accordingly, treated the assessee as an assessee-in-default under section 201(1) of the Act. Interest was also levied under section 201(1A) of the Act for the delay. The Assessing Officer computed the total demand

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Ravikumar Burugupalli, West Godavari

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 198/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 198/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Dy. Cit (International Taxation) V. Ravikumar Burugupalli Income Tax Office Proprietor Sasi Fuel Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Sasi School, Main Road Sankaramatam Road Velivenu Post Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 38/Viz/2025 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.198/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17)] Ravikumar Burugupalli V. Dy. Cit (International Taxation) Proprietor Sasi Fuel Income Tax Office Sasi School, Main Road Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Velivenu Post Sankaramatam Road Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt A. Aruna, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(c)

Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Hyderabad (hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] vide Appeal No. NFAC/2015-16/1005863 dated 13.01.2025 arising out of the order passed under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 30.03.2021. Cross objection is filed by the assessee in support of the order ... property. Ld. AO thereafter issued a show-cause notice dated 22.12.2020 requiring the assessee to show cause why the order under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act should not be passed considering the assessee as “assessee in default”. The assessee submitted response to the Ld.AO stating that

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Trivandrum vs. ITO, Circle Central, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

judgment in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd.'s case (Supra) is concerned, that was rendered in the context of section 201(1), the object of which being compensatory in nature, cannot be of any assistance to the appellants to resist a proceeding under Section

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. JCIT, Special Range, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. JCIT, Special Range, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

DCIT(TDS)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Piramal Enterprises Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4431/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhaildeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) – 2(1), Mumbai, ............... Appellant V/S Piramal Enterprises Limited, Piramal Ananta, Agastya Corporate Park Kamini Junction Lbs Marg Opp. Fire Brigade Kurla, ……………… Respondent Mumbai – 400070 Pan : Aaacn5024A

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi (Virtually present)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT-DR

Section 133B(2)Section 193Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 250

learned Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Delhi, [“learned Addl./Joint CIT(A)”], which in turn arose from the order passed under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act, for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: – 2 “1 ... deducting TDS on accrued interest and excess interest on revision in interest rates for the financial year 2018-19. Accordingly, notice under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act was issued to the assessee calling for various details. In response, the Authorised Representative of the assessee attended and filed

Tyco Fire and Security India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation, Circle 2(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 443/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Tyco Fire & Security India Of Income Tax, Private Ltd., International Taxation, D-601, Campus 6Th Floor, Circle 2(2), Rmz Centennial, Kundanahalli, Vs. Bangalore. Main Road, Mahadevapura S.O., Bengaluru North. Pan: Aabct 0087C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ninad Patade, Ar Respondent By : Dr. Divya K.J., Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2025 O R D E R Per Soundararajan Kthis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Challenging The Order Of The Ld. Cit(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) Dated 20.12.2024 In Respect Of Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company & A Part Of Tyco Group Which Is A Leader In Global Fire Safety & Security Page 2 Of 5

For Appellant: Shri Ninad Patade, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 201(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

Carlsberg India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Gurgaon, Gurugram

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2935/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Bleasstt. Year: 2013-14 Carlsberg India Private Limited, Vs. Dcit, Tds Circle 4Th Floor, Rectangel No. 1, Gurugram, Commercial Complex, Haryana D-4, Saket, New Delhi – 17 (Pan: Aajcs8454J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.K. Aggarwal, Ca Respondent By : Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 201(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT Asstt

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ireo Grace Realtech Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 28/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 251(1)

1 ITA Nos. 24 & 28/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ireo Grace Realtech Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 24/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 251(1)

1 ITA Nos. 24 & 28/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH

Vikas Funds and Kuries (Pvt) Ltd, Trichur vs. ITO, TDS, Ward TDS, Thrissur

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

ITA 470/COCH/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2006-07 Vikas Funds & Kuries Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Vikas Complex, Puthenpeedika P.O. Trichur 680642 [Pan: Chnvo0430D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer-Tds, Thrissur .......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.08.2025

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

Section 201(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM

Chief Education Officer, Dehradun vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, TDS, Dehradun

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 85/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 85/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2016-17) Chief Education Officer, Vs. Income Tax Officer-Tds, Mayurvihar, Sahastradhar Ward Tds, Income Tax Road, Dehradun, Officer, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Pan: Mrtc01830D Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 201Section 201(1)

1 Chief education officer IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “DEHRADUN”/ NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR

M/S. the Coimbatore District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ITO, TDS Ward-2, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1004/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1004/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Coimbatore District Central The Income Tax Officer, Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Vs. Tds Ward-2 (I/C), 80, State Bank Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore – 641 018. [Pan: Aabat 3010F]

For Appellant: Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate

Section 133ASection 194NSection 201Section 201(1)

Needless to say, any payment of tax made by the Cooperative Societies will be given credit to in finalizing the proceedings under section 201(1). Interest under section 201(1A) will run from the due date of deduction till date of passing of order as per statute. 100. Learned Judge

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Madurai

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

ITA 1132/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, IRS, Addl. CIT

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

Kushalava Spinners & Ginners Private Limited, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Guntur

ITA 203/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 194ISection 2(14)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 250(6)

Addl/JCIT (Appeals) —- 2, Pune, dated 18.10.2024, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short “A.O.”) under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of ITA No.203/Viz/2025 Kushalava Spinners and Ginners Private Limited the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) dated ... order passed by Ld.AO u/s 201(1)/(1A) of the IT Act, holding assessee as 'assessee in default within the meaning of section 201(1)/(1A), when in reality no TDS is deductible on the transaction of impugned purchase. 4. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact

M/S. Rita Transport, Burdwan vs. DCIT(TDS), Circle 4(1), Durgapur

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

ITA 585/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234ESection 250

circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the A.O. by raising demand under section 201(1) of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 5,58,641 without appreciating the fact that all PAN of the deductees filed during the course ... assessment proceedings and provision of section 194C(6) had been complied with. Hence demand raised of Rs.5,58,641/- under section 201(1) is illegal has to be deleted. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the action

Trident Infraprojects Private Limited, Guwahati vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Guwahati

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 10(26)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 250Section 40Section 69C

ground that physical copies were presented and not through online mode. Thereafter, the Ld. AR pointed out that the provisions of section 201(1), proviso thereon, would come to his rescue in case the payees have duly disclosed the receipts on which the TDS was supposed to have been made ... addition under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would need to be made only after it is read with the provisions of section 201(1) of the Act, (the proviso and thereon). In this case, if the assessee has evidence to show that the payees have duly disclosed

Income Tax Officer, Alwar vs. Alwar Malt and Agro Foods Manufactures Company Limited, Alwar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 81/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kranti Mehata, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr.-DR

Section 133ASection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

appeals were filed. That order of the ld. CIT(A) arises because the assessee has challenged orders dated 19.03.2020, 19.03.2021 & 06.01.2022 passed under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Alwar Malt and Agro Foods Manufactures Co. Ltd., Alwar. Tax Act 1961 [ for short ... such account in the year under consideration and thereby the assessee was considered as the assessee in default as per the provision of section 201(1) of the Act. Having done so ld. AO noted as per Alwar Malt and Agro Foods Manufactures Co. Ltd., Alwar. provision of section 201

Income Tax Officer, Alwar vs. Alwar Malt and Agro Foods Manufactures Company Limited, Alwar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 80/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kranti Mehata, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr.-DR

Section 133ASection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

Income Tax Officer, Alwar vs. Alwar Malt and Agro Foods Manufactures Company Limited, Alwar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 79/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kranti Mehata, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr.-DR

Section 133ASection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)