Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

176 results for “TDS”+ Section 221clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi282 Mumbai273 Bangalore176 Chennai118 Karnataka90 Kolkata78 Ahmedabad72 Hyderabad40 Raipur35 Jaipur33 Cochin29 Pune23 Chandigarh13 Rajkot13 Jodhpur10 Lucknow10 Surat8 Guwahati6 Amritsar6 Visakhapatnam5 Indore5 SC5 Cuttack4 Varanasi4 Nagpur3 Agra3 Kerala3 Ranchi2 Allahabad2 Telangana2 Dehradun2 Jabalpur2 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)94 Section 20176 Section 19260 Section 1060 TDS46 Section 153A45 Addition to Income34 Survey u/s 133A31 Section 133A30 Disallowance

M/S. DECCAN CHARTERS (P) LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1283/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 201(1)Section 221

TDS, are different footing vis-a-vis cases of default involving other taxes covered under section 221 of the Act. [iii] In this

M/S. DECCAN CHARTERS (P) LTD,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 176 · Page 1 of 9

...

23

ITA 1284/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: Disposed

ITAT Bangalore

22 Nov 2021

AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice- & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 201(1)Section 221

TDS, are different footing vis-a-vis cases of default involving other taxes covered under section 221 of the Act. [iii] In this

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S KBR INFRATECH LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1303/BANG/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri. C. Eranna, JCITFor Respondent: Dr. C. P. Ramaswami, Advocate

Section 156Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 221

TDS, etc., 05. The Ld. AR submitted that consequent to the order u/s.201 /201(1A), the AO sent the demand notice dt 30.7.2013 u/s.156 in Form no.7 . Under sub-section (1) of Section 220, any amount otherwise than by way of advance tax, specified as payable in a notice of demand u/s.156 shall be paid within thirty days

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SHRI. K. SURENDRA NAGU, BANGALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 933/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: None

Section 140ASection 221(1)Section 234B

221(1) by the Assessing Officer after giving due opportunity to the assessee, which was not availed by him, is totally justified by the Assessing Officer. 3. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the CIT (Appeals) in so far as it relates to the above

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

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

ITA 496/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS. Furthermore, IBM India had duly deducted taxes under section 192 of the Act in respect of same secondment reimbursements. Given the same, there was no requirement on part of the IBM Foreign Entities to obtain a certificate under section 197 of the Act. Additionally, they submitted that the provisions of section 197 of the Act are not mandatory

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

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

ITA 499/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS. Furthermore, IBM India had duly deducted taxes under section 192 of the Act in respect of same secondment reimbursements. Given the same, there was no requirement on part of the IBM Foreign Entities to obtain a certificate under section 197 of the Act. Additionally, they submitted that the provisions of section 197 of the Act are not mandatory

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

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

ITA 497/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS. Furthermore, IBM India had duly deducted taxes under section 192 of the Act in respect of same secondment reimbursements. Given the same, there was no requirement on part of the IBM Foreign Entities to obtain a certificate under section 197 of the Act. Additionally, they submitted that the provisions of section 197 of the Act are not mandatory

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

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

ITA 544/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

TDS. Furthermore, IBM India had duly deducted taxes under section 192 of the Act in respect of same secondment reimbursements. Given the same, there was no requirement on part of the IBM Foreign Entities to obtain a certificate under section 197 of the Act. Additionally, they submitted that the provisions of section 197 of the Act are not mandatory

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 508/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 512/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 513/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 509/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 517/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 510/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 518/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 514/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 511/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 516/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 507/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct

M/S. LIFE INSRANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 515/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

section 192 on the employer to deduct tax on such allowance. Moreover, it is also not possible to collate bills for every minuscule expenses and mere non-collation of bills in support of amount expenses cannot prevail over the fact of incurring such expenses. It is found that the Assessing Officer has not gone through the Central Board of Direct