BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

12 results for “TDS”+ Section 6Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi55Raipur39Kolkata39Mumbai31Bangalore26Jodhpur19Pune13Ahmedabad12Jaipur10Cochin10Nagpur9Lucknow8Rajkot8Amritsar6Surat6Chennai5Chandigarh4Varanasi3Indore3Hyderabad1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 206C23Natural Justice9Penalty7Disallowance7Addition to Income7Section 115J6Section 234A6Section 271(1)(c)6Section 40A(3)6Section 154

SHRI GIRISHKUMAR RAMNARAYAN SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-2, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 340/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

6A) with respect to those entities for which Form 27BA has been filed by the assessee and the same is found to be in order/correct. Further, Ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the interest leviable under Section 206C(7) is consequential, compensatory and mandatory in nature. Accordingly, CIT partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The assessee is in appeal

OFFICE OF THE GEOLOGIST,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO (TDS), GANDHINAGAR

5
TDS4
Section 206C(7)3

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

ITA 262/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani, Sr. DR
Section 206C

TDS), B-Block, Third Floor, Vs 401, Udyog Bhawan, Bahumali Bhavan, Hajipura, Sector-11, Gandhinagar Himatnagar, Sabarkantha-383001 PAN : AAALO 0111 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Divatia, AR Revenue by : Shri Mukesh Thakwani, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 14/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/07/2022 आदेश

M/S. SHARDABEN EDUCATION TRUST,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2312/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2312/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2014-2015 M/S. Shardaben Education Trust, Income Tax Officer, Set, Opp. Kailash Dham, Vs. (Exemption) Pethapur, Ward-1, Gandhinagar-382610. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsingh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 154Section 264Section 264(1)

TDS credit and self-assessment tax should be refunded. However, the AO vide order dated 09th November 2016 under section 143(3) of the Act rejected the claim of the assessee by holding that the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act was not made in the return of income. Therefore

AHMEDABAD STRIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, TDS CIRCLE, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2211/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 202Section 206Section 206CSection 210Section 271C

TDS, Circle, Ahmedabad dated 27/03/2019 needs to be rectified. I.T.A No. 2211/Ahd/2025 Ahmedabad Strips Pvt. Ltd., A.Y. 2012-13 03. That the Appellant Company has paid all the Taxes and liabilities of TDS/TCS for the year under consideration. However, the order passed u/s 2026C(6A) r.w.s. 206C (7) of the Act without appreciating the facts on records is erroneous

M/S. SINGHAL STEELS,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, TDS-2, VADODARA

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

ITA 185/AHD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 02/05/2022
Section 133ASection 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

6A)/206C(7) of the IT Act, 1961 should not be passed in his case for failure to collect TCS of Rs.1,48,112/- for the FY 2013-14. The deductor/collector, vide his reply dated 01.02.2016 stated that "the said section is not applicable to him as he is a trader". The ITO, TDS

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1751/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2293/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2114/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3492/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3470/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2276/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. HemaniSr. Advocate withShriParimalSinhParmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R with Shri Lalit P. Jain. Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

M/S. PRAMUKH COTPRESS INDIA PVT. LTD.,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, S.K.WARD- 2,, HIMATNAGAR

ITA 3152/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Parimal Singh Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT/DR
Section 250(6)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

6A and 6B of the A.O.’s order that the disallowance was in respect of electricity expenses that the assessee had incurred in cash to UGVCL amounting to Rs. 9,96,163/- and further electrical expenses of Rs. 67,000/- incurred in cash. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that this issue stood squarely covered in favour of the assessee