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.

33 results for “TDS”+ Section 200(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi907Mumbai889Bangalore797Pune587Patna476Indore447Chennai435Hyderabad202Ahmedabad176Kolkata176Jaipur155Raipur154Cochin148Karnataka139Nagpur121Chandigarh94Cuttack73Visakhapatnam51Rajkot51Lucknow40Surat39Agra35Dehradun35Amritsar33Jabalpur31Allahabad28Jodhpur23Ranchi21Panaji17Guwahati15SC5Varanasi5Telangana2Calcutta1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 234E118Section 200A99TDS26Section 20025Section 15424Section 200A(1)21Section 1020Section 4012Section 23412Addition to Income

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 202/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 200Section 200ASection 206CSection 234ESection 250o

200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 7.1. Clauses (c) to (f) of section 200A(1) was substituted by the Finance

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2

12
Deduction8
Limitation/Time-bar8

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 203/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 200Section 200ASection 206CSection 234ESection 250o

200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 206C which is to be delivered or caused to be delivered for tax deducted at source or tax collected at source, as the case may be, on or after the 1st day of July, 2012." 7.1. Clauses (c) to (f) of section 200A(1) was substituted by the Finance

KASHMIR DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. CPC TDS, GHAZIBAD

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

ITA 160/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Shri. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 200ASection 230Section 234Section 234E

TDS returns imposed late fee under section 234E amounting to " 163,309/- and rupees 15,200/- respectively- 3. In the written

KASHMIR DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. CPC TDS, GHAZIBAD

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

ITA 159/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Shri. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 200ASection 230Section 234Section 234E

TDS returns imposed late fee under section 234E amounting to Rs.163,309/- and rupees 15,200/- respectively- 3. In the written

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 111/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

3. Thus, TDS-CPC has imposed a late fee u/s 234E amounting to Rs. 25,200/- for the delay in filing of Quarterly TDS statements in the intimations issued u/s 200A of the Act, for various quarters of filing for TDS statements in form 24Q, 26Q and 26EQ of the Financial Year 2017-18 (relevant

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 26/ASR/2021[2013-14,Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

3 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 29.08.2016 passed by the CPC TDS u/s 200(A) of the Act is a vitiated order having been passed in an arbitrary manner and is thus bad in law and void ab- initio and also the fees of Rs.18,400/- levied therein

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 30/ASR/2021[2014-15,Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

3 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 29.08.2016 passed by the CPC TDS u/s 200(A) of the Act is a vitiated order having been passed in an arbitrary manner and is thus bad in law and void ab- initio and also the fees of Rs.18,400/- levied therein

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 29/ASR/2021[2014-15.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

3 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 29.08.2016 passed by the CPC TDS u/s 200(A) of the Act is a vitiated order having been passed in an arbitrary manner and is thus bad in law and void ab- initio and also the fees of Rs.18,400/- levied therein

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 28/ASR/2021[2013-14.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

3 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 29.08.2016 passed by the CPC TDS u/s 200(A) of the Act is a vitiated order having been passed in an arbitrary manner and is thus bad in law and void ab- initio and also the fees of Rs.18,400/- levied therein

SHRI SATISH KUMAR. S/O. SH. HANS RAJ ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 258/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A No.258/Asr/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2014-15 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Shri Satish Kumar S/O Hans Raj, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of B-12, Mch-366/13, Billa Income-Tax-1, Jalandhar House, New Jagatpura, Hoshiarpur Pan: Aawpk 0932 D अपीलाथ" Appellant अपीलाथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

TDS. Regarding expenses of Rs.5,91,030, the claim of business relation and expenses debited to capital account but no details are filed. Hence, these expenses were liable to be disallowed. The AO was require to make enquiry for recovery suit claim of Rs.2,26,53,638 and why these were not reflected in balance sheet. Satish Kumar v. Pr.CIT

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD ( EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 189/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

200 or proviso to section 206C. Such penalty was prescribed at the rate of Rs.100 for every day during which the failure continued. With effect from 01.06.2012, three major changes were introduced in the Act. Section 234E as introduced for the first time to provide for charging of fee for late filing of the statements. Such fee would be levied

SH. GURJINDER SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT DR
Section 194CSection 263

TDS and for this reason tax was not deducted at source. Complete detail of freight payment in the two units is enclosed for your ready reference. The Explanation 2 to Section 263 reads as under:- “For the purpose of section 263 of Income Tax Act an order passed by the AO shall be deemed to be erroneous

KC SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST (REGD),NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER . TDS., JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 45/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.M. Surendranath (DR)
Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

TDS statement and issuance of statement under section 200 A, an adjustment could be made in respect of the fee, if any shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the act. Since the amendment was prospective, it was not applicable to the quarter ending on 31.03.2015. 8. Accordingly, the orders

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 166/ASR/2021[2014-15 Q1]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

3. The ld. counsel of the assessee argued that there is no provision of levying the fees u/s 234E prior to 1st June, 2015. The issue of levy of fee u/s 234E has been settled in view of the plethora of decisions. The ld. AR has contended that the order u/s 154 should be passed against the order of section

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 165/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

3. The ld. counsel of the assessee argued that there is no provision of levying the fees u/s 234E prior to 1st June, 2015. The issue of levy of fee u/s 234E has been settled in view of the plethora of decisions. The ld. AR has contended that the order u/s 154 should be passed against the order of section

B D S TECHNOLOGIES ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 164/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q3]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

3. The ld. counsel of the assessee argued that there is no provision of levying the fees u/s 234E prior to 1st June, 2015. The issue of levy of fee u/s 234E has been settled in view of the plethora of decisions. The ld. AR has contended that the order u/s 154 should be passed against the order of section

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 167/ASR/2021[2014-15 Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

3. The ld. counsel of the assessee argued that there is no provision of levying the fees u/s 234E prior to 1st June, 2015. The issue of levy of fee u/s 234E has been settled in view of the plethora of decisions. The ld. AR has contended that the order u/s 154 should be passed against the order of section

B D S TECHOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 163/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

3. The ld. counsel of the assessee argued that there is no provision of levying the fees u/s 234E prior to 1st June, 2015. The issue of levy of fee u/s 234E has been settled in view of the plethora of decisions. The ld. AR has contended that the order u/s 154 should be passed against the order of section

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 185/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mohit Kumar Nigam, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

3 raised by the appellant, charging of late fee u/s 234E for filing TDS statement in 24Q for 3rd and 4th Quarter of the F.Y. 2012-13 relevant to A.Y. 2013-14 beyond the prescribed due date. 5.2 have considered the grounds of appeal, gone through the submissions of the appellant. As per the submission of the appellant, the TDS

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 186/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mohit Kumar Nigam, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

3 raised by the appellant, charging of late fee u/s 234E for filing TDS statement in 24Q for 3rd and 4th Quarter of the F.Y. 2012-13 relevant to A.Y. 2013-14 beyond the prescribed due date. 5.2 have considered the grounds of appeal, gone through the submissions of the appellant. As per the submission of the appellant, the TDS