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.

135 results for “disallowance”+ Section 194Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai548Kolkata416Delhi402Chennai200Bangalore181Ahmedabad135Hyderabad69Jaipur58Cuttack52Cochin48Rajkot42Visakhapatnam40Raipur38Pune38Indore36Nagpur25Chandigarh25Amritsar21Surat19Panaji17Karnataka15Lucknow14Allahabad13Ranchi12Guwahati11Patna7Calcutta7Kerala7Jodhpur5Dehradun5Agra4SC3Jabalpur3Telangana2Gauhati1Uttarakhand1Rajasthan1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 40105Section 143(3)100Section 80I99Disallowance92Addition to Income67Deduction47Section 143(2)44Section 194C44TDS35Section 14A

EAGLE STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 197Section 197ASection 40

section 194C(7), and just because there is violation of provisions ofsection 194C(7), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) does

Showing 1–20 of 135 · Page 1 of 7

23
Depreciation22
Section 43B17

HYDCO ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,,CHHATRAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2858/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2018AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 234CSection 40

disallowance in respect of payments made to V. Logistics Services of Rs.99,000/- and to Prajapati Carriage Services of Rs.2,30,400/- totalling to Rs.3,29,400/- by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act for non compliance of provisions of section 194C

ASIAN MILLS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1397/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1397/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Asian Mills Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., 104, Sakar Iii, Vs. Range-1, Opp. Old High Court, Ahmedabad. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aabca8236G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1531/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T., Asian Mills Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 104, Sakar Iii, Ahmedabad. Opp. Old High Court, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aabca8236G

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R
Section 194Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 6Section 7

disallowances of Rs. 2,59,03,812/- made by the AO under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. The fact in brief is that, during the assessment proceeding, the AO found that the assessee has not deducted tax under section 194C

CRYSTAL QUINONE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1420/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & M/S. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1420/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बनाम/ Crystal Quinone Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Cir-1(1)(2), Opp. Old Excise Chawky, Vs. Ahmedabad S.M. Road, Ahmedabad

For Appellant: Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Santosh Karnani, Sr. DR
Section 145ASection 14ASection 194CSection 40

disallowance of Rs. 14,59,857/- on account of non-deduction of TDS under section 194C read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. The facts

SUMMIT (INDIA) WATER TREATMENT & SERVICES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-4, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1338/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 May 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 271BSection 40

section 194C of 195 of the Act Considering this, your goodself has proposed to disallow the entire amount of Rs.2.03

THE ITO,PATAN WARD-3,, MEHSANA vs. M/S. SIDDHI VINAYAK TRANSPORT, MEHSANA

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2348/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Bains, CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: Shri M.J. Shah, A.R
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

section 194C of the Act, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was required to be made. 22. The Assessing

SHRI SAMIR CHANDRAVADAB BHALAVAT,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SABARKANTHA WARD-4,, MODASA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 216/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194C(7)Section 40

disallowed under section 40(a)( ia). In other words where tax is not deductible addition under section 40(a)( ia) cannot be made. From this it follows that second proviso to section 194C

SHRI VISHAL D PALANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1603/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

disallowance. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has not deducted TDS upon the freight payments in question. Both the lower authorities invoke Section 194C

SHRI VISHAL DILIP PALANY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(4),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1410/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Vishal Dilip Palani, Income Tax Officer, C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate, Vs Ward 9(4), 903, Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Alopp 0931 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xv, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A) In Short]” Dated 04.02.2013. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 357 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Giving Details Of The Deteriorating Health Of His Father As Well As Financial Problems Faced During The Relevant Period Which Resulted In The Said Delay. Keeping In View The Same, We Are Satisfied That There Was A Sufficient Cause For The Delay Of 357 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Learned Departmental Representative Has Not Raised Any Objection In This Regard. We, Therefore, Shri Vishal Dilip Palani Vs. Ito Ay : 2009-10 2

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

disallowance. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has not deducted TDS upon the freight payments in question. Both the lower authorities invoke Section 194C

BURT HILL DESIGN PVT. LTD. ( NOW KNOWN AS STANTEC CONSULTING PVT. LTD. ),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1954/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jul 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 195Section 40

section 194C or 194J, and since the assessee did not do so, the amounts were disallowable under section 40(a)(i). The assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE.1(1)(1)., AHMEDABAD vs. M/S.BURT HILL DESIGN PVT. LTD.(NOW STANTEC CONSULTING PVT. LTD.),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 2104/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jul 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 195Section 40

section 194C or 194J, and since the assessee did not do so, the amounts were disallowable under section 40(a)(i). The assessee

ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, these grounds of assessee’s appeal are partly allowed

ITA 2837/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: RespondentbyFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

section 194C of the Act and disallowed by the Ld. AO. Both the disallowance were confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). Hence

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BAJAJ HERBALS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is, thus, allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1088/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 194A(1)Section 194A(3)Section 40

Section 194C or 195 disallowance made there is not sustainable. 19. Apart from that the following were the submission made

ITO, WARD-2(1) (1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. EYLEX FILMS PVT. LTD., RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1808/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & ShriFor Respondent: Bandish Soparkar, A.Rs
Section 194JSection 194jSection 40Section 9

194C of the Act. 3.10. Having considered the facts and submission, it is apparent that the procurement charges paid by the appellant to the film distributors does not attract the TDS provisions as alleged by the AO and therefore invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is not justified and the disallowance

ITO, WARD-2(1) (1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. EYLEX FILMS PVT. LTD., RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 388/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & ShriFor Respondent: Bandish Soparkar, A.Rs
Section 194JSection 194jSection 40Section 9

194C of the Act. 3.10. Having considered the facts and submission, it is apparent that the procurement charges paid by the appellant to the film distributors does not attract the TDS provisions as alleged by the AO and therefore invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is not justified and the disallowance

SHRI MOHMED SHAKIL MOHMED SHAFI MUTWALLI,,HIMATNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SABARKANTHA WARD-3., HIMATNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

disallowance ignoring the provisions of Section 194C (6) of the Act and also ignoring the binding decision of Hon'ble Gujarat

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI LOGISTICS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2007/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Soparkar & Vartik Chokshi, A.R
Section 14ASection 40Section 41(1)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was to be made - Whether instant was a case of contract for goods and is neither a contract for service, nor is it a case of paying of commission or brokerage - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, it was covered neither under section 194C

THE DCITANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING CO.LTD.,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1316/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Roysr.No.

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148

disallowance of the expenses for ₹ 4,09,29,379.00 paid to the clearing and forwarding agent without the deduction of TDS under section 194C

THE DCITANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING CO.LTD.,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1656/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Roysr.No.

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148

disallowance of the expenses for ₹ 4,09,29,379.00 paid to the clearing and forwarding agent without the deduction of TDS under section 194C

SAGAR POWERTEX PVT. LTD. (EARLIER SAGAR AGENCIES PVT.LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 304/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.304/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Sagar Powertex Pvt. Ltd., J.C.I.T., (Earlier Sagar Agencies Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Range-8, 803, Sahajanand Complex, Ahmedabad. Shahibaug Road, Shahiibaug Ahmedabad-380004. Pan: Aadcs0473P

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R
Section 14ASection 40Section 80Section 80I

disallowance of ₹ 5,20,924.00 on account of non-deduction of TDS under section 194C of the Act. 14. The assessee