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.

31 results for “TDS”+ Section 246A(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi176Indore119Chennai109Mumbai108Pune70Bangalore31Jabalpur23Dehradun22Kolkata16Chandigarh12Nagpur11Surat11Panaji8Jaipur8Visakhapatnam5Amritsar5Hyderabad5Karnataka4Lucknow4Jodhpur4Raipur3Cochin2Ahmedabad2Cuttack1Agra1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E61Section 200A53Section 14333Deduction18Disallowance16Section 200(3)13Section 15413Section 20012TDS12Depreciation

M/S. BANGALORE PHARMACEUTICAL AND RESEARCH LABORATORY PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 491/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar, H., CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 244ASection 36(1)(va)

TDS per data uploaded by deductors and tax payment challans Page 10 of 22 reported through authorised banks. Hence the adjustment made is beyond the powers of CPC. b) This is 'further confirmed by the order under u/s. 154 under appeal that CPC is unable to process the rectification request filed . c) However, learned CIT(A) has not dealt with

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 246A9
Addition to Income8

THOMAS ABRAHAM,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),CIRCLE-1(3)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 389/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

246A. In absence of the power of authority to make such adjustment under section 200A of the Act, any calculation of the fee would not partake the character of the intimation under said provision and it could be argued that such an order would not be open to any rectification or appeal. Upon introduction of the recasted clause (c), this

THOMAS ABRAHAM,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),CIRCLE-1(3)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 388/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

246A. In absence of the power of authority to make such adjustment under section 200A of the Act, any calculation of the fee would not partake the character of the intimation under said provision and it could be argued that such an order would not be open to any rectification or appeal. Upon introduction of the recasted clause (c), this

THOMAS ABRAHAM,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),CIRCLE-1(3)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 390/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

246A. In absence of the power of authority to make such adjustment under section 200A of the Act, any calculation of the fee would not partake the character of the intimation under said provision and it could be argued that such an order would not be open to any rectification or appeal. Upon introduction of the recasted clause (c), this

THOMAS ABRAHAM,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),CIRCLE-1(3)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 387/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Manohar Naidu, CA
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

246A. In absence of the power of authority to make such adjustment under section 200A of the Act, any calculation of the fee would not partake the character of the intimation under said provision and it could be argued that such an order would not be open to any rectification or appeal. Upon introduction of the recasted clause (c), this

DY DIT vs. M/S INFOSYS BPO LTD.,,

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the cross

ITA 1143/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 115ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(b)Section 206ASection 246A

246A before the CIT(A) without prejudice. 2. The ld.CIT(A)-IV, Bangalore has erred in upholding the validity of intimation passed by the learned Income tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bangalore under section 200A of the IT Act. On facts and in the ci8rcumstandfes of the case and law applicable, the intimation so passed is without jurisdiction

M/S. TEEKAYS FURNITURE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-3(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessees are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 334/BANG/2021[2015-16 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2021

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri.Pranav Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Sowmya Virupakshaiah Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 206CSection 234E

TDS). C- 3(1). Bangalore. The AR stated that he will check and file the copy of order u/s 200A in this office on 28-03-2019 itself However, no such order was filed. It is a fact that the order u/s 200A is passed online and hence it is sent immediately online to the deductor (assessee). In view

ADDL/JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BANGALORE vs. M/S TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 525/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: FixedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115Section 115QSection 143(3)Section 246A

246A provides for appellate remedy for different types of tax demands raised upon the assessee and there should not be any dispute that the assessees have been filing separate appeals for the demand raised under different sections of the Act. 4.12 In the case of Genpact India P Ltd, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court noticed that the additional

M/S TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 275/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: FixedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115Section 115QSection 143(3)Section 246A

246A provides for appellate remedy for different types of tax demands raised upon the assessee and there should not be any dispute that the assessees have been filing separate appeals for the demand raised under different sections of the Act. 4.12 In the case of Genpact India P Ltd, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court noticed that the additional

M/S WIPRO LTD. vs. ITO,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and S

ITA 1544/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijaypal Rao

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Manjunatha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajashekar, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 139ASection 156Section 200ASection 206ASection 90(2)Section 90A(2)

246A before the CIT(A) without prejudice. 2. The ld.CIT(A)-IV, Bangalore has erred in upholding the validity of intimation passed by the learned Income tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bangalore under section 200A of the IT Act. On facts and in the ci8rcumstandfes of the case and law applicable, the intimation so passed is without jurisdiction

M/S. GE BE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2615/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George K. George

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly &For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 92D

TDS on the assessee could not have been fastened and consequently, the proceedings under section 201 and 201(1A) could not have been initiated. For the aforementioned reason the substantial question of law is answered in favour of assessee and against the revenue. 11.4. The basis on which the disallowance was made has been reversed by Hon’ble Karnataka High

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , UDUPI , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 255/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 253/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 254/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 243/BANG/2018[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 245/BANG/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 247/BANG/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 248/BANG/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 249/BANG/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit

M/S MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LIMITED ,MANIPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , , UDUPI

240 & 241/Bang/2018

ITA 250/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Rao, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143Section 154

C&AG against the Department granting interest on refunds when there was no provision in the budget for granting such interest. The CIT-A also refused to give relief stating that non-credit of TDS was not appealable u/s 246A(1)(a). 3. This non-credit of TDS was dealt with by the ITAT in respect of claim for credit