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.

25 results for “TDS”+ Section 197Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai93Nagpur92Delhi59Karnataka26Bangalore25Kolkata22Mumbai15Cochin10Jaipur6Panaji6Hyderabad5Pune2Visakhapatnam1Chandigarh1Jodhpur1Lucknow1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E43Section 271H32Section 36(1)(vii)19Section 200A19Addition to Income19Deduction16TDS14Disallowance12Section 4011Section 115J

ROOMAN TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)& TDS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 536/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q 3]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 20110
Section 201(1)9

ROOMAN TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 533/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q4]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

ROOMAN TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD., ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 534/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q1]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

ROOMAN TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 535/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71[statements under sub-section (2A) or sub section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided

KOOUD SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 82/BANG/2022[2013-14 (24Q-QII)]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Mar 2022

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Tyagi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh D, JCIT(DR)
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234Section 234E

197A, a certificate as required by section 203 and returns under sections 206 and 206C and 71 [statements under sub-section (2A) or subsection (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub- section (3) or under sub-section (3A) of section 206C] shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be: Provided further

MR. SANDEEP SAMANTHA,MANGALURU vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC - TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1235/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Sept 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2016-17 Shri. Sandeep Samantha, Vs. The Additional Commissioner Of D.No.2-1-7/7, Shop No.2, Income-Tax, Manasa Residency, Chilimbi, Urwa, Cpc- Tds, Mangaluru – 575 006. Ghaziabad. Pan : Axlps 5874 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Srinivas Kamath, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Shankar Prasad, Add. Cit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A), Mangaluru Dated 16.01.2019 For Assessment Year 2016-17 In Respect Of Filing Of Form No.26Q For Quarter No.1 Of The Financial Year 2015-16. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas Kamath, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad, Add. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 194ISection 200Section 200(3)Section 234ESection 3

TDS u/s 194IA. From No. 26QB and challan of tax deposited were generated on 5.4.2014 from the electronic system which is evident from the orders passed, which clearly mentions the date of filing of challan cum statement as "5.4.2014". Thus, levy of fee u/s 234E is not applicable at all, because there is no delay in filing of the said

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS - CIRCLE, HUBBALLI vs. M/S SHIMOGA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD, SHIVAMOGGA

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 295/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Capt. Pradeep Shoury AryaFor Respondent: Shri L. Bharath, CA
Section 194Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 197ASection 201(1)

TDS on the interest payments exceeding Rs.10,000/- as required u/s 194A of the Act as declarations vide Form No.15H/15G were not submitted as per the provisions of Sec. 197A(1A) of the Act. The AO opined that, the interest payments made by the assessee does not qualify for exemption u/s 194A(3)(v) of the Act as the assessee

ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, this ground is allowed

ITA 793/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 194HSection 40

section 194H also and 197A (1F). Accordingly the AO disallowed the entire credit card expenses of Rs.1,18,27,431/- for non deduction of TDS

THE KARNATAKA BANK LTD,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1906/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan & Smt. R. Lalitha, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

TDS provisions in the light of the Central Board of Direct Taxes Notification No, 56 of 2012 dated December 31, 2012 : Notification No. S. 0. .3069(E) [No. 56/2012 (F. No. 275/53/2012- ff(B)], dated December 31, 2012' [Superseded by Notification No. S. 0. 2143(E) (No. 47/2016 (F. No. 275/53/2012-11(B), dated June 17, 2016] & ITA No.229/PAN/2018

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,, MANGALORE

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

ITA 1396/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

THE KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, MANGALORE

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

ITA 1335/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

THE KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1334/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

THE KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1335/BANG/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,, MANGALORE

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

ITA 1397/BANG/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,, MANGALORE

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

ITA 1265/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

ACIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S KARNATAKA BANK LTD.,, MANGALORE

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

ITA 753/BANG/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

TDS provisions in the light of the CBDT circular No.56 of 12 dated 31/12/2012 : NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3069(E) [NO.56/2012 (F. NO. 275/53/2012-IT(B)], DATED 31-12-2012 [SUPERSEDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO 2143(E) (NO.47/2016 (F.NO.275/53/2012-IT(B), DATED 17-6-2016] In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1F) of section 197A

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, HUBBALLI vs. M/S. DAVANAGERE URBAN CO-OP BANK LTD, DAVANAGERE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1815/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri M Narasimha Raju, JCITFor Respondent: Smt. Soumya K, Advocate
Section 1Section 194(3)Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 197ASection 201Section 201(1)

197A(1A) of the Act. The AO opined that, the interest payments made by the deductor does not qualify for exemption u/s 1 94A(3) (v) of the Act as the deductor is doing the business of Banking and issued a show cause proposing to assess the short deduction

SHRI. PANKAJ RANKA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE

In the result, the asssessee’s appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 35/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ak Garodia & Shri Pankaj Ranka, No.157, 15Th Cross, Cubbonpet Main Raod, Bengaluru. . Appellant Pan No. – Adzpr8650H. Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(3) (3), Bangalore. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Bharath L, C.A Respondent By : Shri Palani Kumar, Acit Date Of Hearing : 22-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : -11-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Palani Kumar, ACIT
Section 194ASection 197ASection 40

section 197A read with rule 29C, where a declaration is furnished to the Appellant in the prescribed form (i.e. Form 15G), the Appellant is not liable/required to deduct TDS

SHRI. KHADARI SYYEADHUSENPEERA SYYEADKHAJAAMIN,BAGALKOT vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE, , BENGALURU

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1172/BANG/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jan 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(1)Section 201Section 250Section 40

TDS under the head ‘Crane Expenses’ for both the assessment years under consideration. It is observed form the assessment order that the assessee has paid crane charges to one Saurav Mittal, without deducting tax at source and nor the assessee submitted the Form 26A to the prescribed authority as per rules. The coordinate bench of the Tribunal in case

CGI INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 737/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 154Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206ASection 90

TDS would be deductible at the above-mentioned rates will also apply in cases where the taxpayer files a declaration in Form 150 or 1511 (under section 197A