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.

2,100 results for “TDS”+ Section 14clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,118Delhi4,070Bangalore2,100Chennai1,465Kolkata976Pune656Hyderabad576Ahmedabad518Raipur364Jaipur358Indore310Karnataka281Nagpur278Chandigarh277Cochin253Surat197Visakhapatnam171Rajkot128Lucknow92Cuttack85Amritsar79Dehradun53Ranchi49Jabalpur45Patna44Panaji42Jodhpur42Telangana40Agra38Guwahati34Allahabad26SC19Varanasi14Kerala12Calcutta12Himachal Pradesh8Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana3Uttarakhand3J&K2Orissa2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Addition to Income58Section 143(3)53Section 4048Deduction45Disallowance44TDS39Section 10A33Section 14729Section 25028Section 43B

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

Showing 1–20 of 2,100 · Page 1 of 105

...
25
Section 14825
Section 20123

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 124/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 125/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 122/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 121/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 130/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 119/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 123/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 118/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 129/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 128/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 127/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 126/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS BPM LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 120/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.116 To 130/Bang/2021 Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act. The claim: The use of software is not royalty within the I T Act 53. I find that the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Samsung (Supra) is applicable in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the claim that use of software

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 64/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.61 To 98/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2017-18 (Excluding March 2016)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act.” 9. The final conclusion of the CIT(A) on the issue is in paragraph 398 of his order which reads thus: “In view of the above, the argument of the appellant that consideration paid for purchase of software, access to various databases, cloud computing, cloud space hiring, access

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 65/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.61 To 98/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2017-18 (Excluding March 2016)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act.” 9. The final conclusion of the CIT(A) on the issue is in paragraph 398 of his order which reads thus: “In view of the above, the argument of the appellant that consideration paid for purchase of software, access to various databases, cloud computing, cloud space hiring, access

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 66/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.61 To 98/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2017-18 (Excluding March 2016)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act.” 9. The final conclusion of the CIT(A) on the issue is in paragraph 398 of his order which reads thus: “In view of the above, the argument of the appellant that consideration paid for purchase of software, access to various databases, cloud computing, cloud space hiring, access

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 67/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.61 To 98/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2017-18 (Excluding March 2016)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act.” 9. The final conclusion of the CIT(A) on the issue is in paragraph 398 of his order which reads thus: “In view of the above, the argument of the appellant that consideration paid for purchase of software, access to various databases, cloud computing, cloud space hiring, access

INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 68/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.61 To 98/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2017-18 (Excluding March 2016)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

section 14(a)(iii) and 14(b)(ii) of the Copyright Act.” 9. The final conclusion of the CIT(A) on the issue is in paragraph 398 of his order which reads thus: “In view of the above, the argument of the appellant that consideration paid for purchase of software, access to various databases, cloud computing, cloud space hiring, access