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.

108 results for “TDS”+ Section 249clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai321Delhi270Chennai131Bangalore108Karnataka89Raipur63Chandigarh60Kolkata52Cochin51Jaipur43Ahmedabad37Pune30Hyderabad30Indore23Surat22Lucknow21Visakhapatnam17Amritsar9Cuttack7Rajkot6Agra4Varanasi4Nagpur3Guwahati3Jodhpur2Panaji2Telangana2Dehradun1Patna1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 234E60Addition to Income58Section 143(3)56Section 20050Deduction49Section 24844TDS40Disallowance38Section 14834Section 206C

M/S FIZA DEVELOPERS & INTER TRADE PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1257/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Aug 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T.A No.1257/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2005-06) M/S. Fiza Developers & Inter Trade P. Ltd, No.25/1, Residency Road, Bangalore .. Appellant Pan : Aaacf5868N V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle -11(3), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jcit Heard On : 25.08.2015 Pronounced On : 27.08.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George: In This Appeal Filed By Assessee Directed Against An Order Dt.17.06.2013, Its Grievance Is That The Cit (A) Dismissed Its Appeal For Non-Payment Of Tax Due On Returned Income. 02. When The Matter Came Up Before Us, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Total Tax Due As Per The Return Filed Was Rs.87,14,679/- Out Of Which, Rs.16,90,412/- Stood Credited On Account Of Tds. As Per The Ld. Ar Though It Was True That Assessee Had Not Paid Full Amount Of Tax At The Time Of Filing The Return Or Before The Appeal Was Filed, It Was Later Paid In Full. Ld. Ar

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT
Section 249

TDS against the above amount was Rs.16,90,412/-. Assessee has enclosed self-assessment tax challan for Rs.45,79,085/- paid on 28.01.2010, Rs.25,00,000/- paid on 31.03.2006 and Rs.36,33,854/- paid on 30.05.2006. Thus the admitted tax stood fully paid by 2010. CIT (A) dismissed appeal of the assessee for the sole reason that admitted taxes were

Showing 1–20 of 108 · Page 1 of 6

30
Section 19528
Section 195A23

PEOPLE TREE CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHAMARAJPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2270/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. R. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. V. Parithivel, JCIT
Section 115BSection 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

section 249(4) of the Act. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) erred in not considering the submission that appellant has filed People Tree Chits Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore Page 2 of 7 return of income and the entire tax payable on returned income is covered by the TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all these 4 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1295/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS.\n29. Therefore it should be clear that once the income falls in the category\ndescribed under 9(1)(vii) irrespective of the fact whether the amount paid by\nAMAT India is equal to the cost incurred by the SECONDER or not. These\nquestions are irrelevant for deciding the taxability of the income from Fees\nfor Technical Services.\nTaxation under

M/S INFOSYS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 718/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojaria & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/S. Infosys Ltd., The Assistant Electronic City, Commissioner It(Tp)A No. Hosur Road, Of Income Tax, 2012-13 718/Bang/2017 Bangalore – 560 Circle – 100. 3(1)(1), Pan: Bangalore. Aaaci4798L : Shri Padamchand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri K.V. Arvind & Shri Dilip, Revenue By Standing Counsels For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 15-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of Final Assessment Order Dated 28/02/2017 Passed By The Ld.Acit, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: General & Legal Grounds 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer & The Directions Of Hon’Ble Drp To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Grounds On Denial Of Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In Respect Of 4 Sez Units Viz., Chennai – Unit 1, Chandigarh, Mangalore - Unit 1 & Pune Unit 1 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Denying Deduction Claimed Under Section 10Aa In The Return Of Income Totally Amounting To Rs. 2227,82,65,630 In Respect

Section 10ASection 14ASection 2Section 2(24)Section 40

section 40(a)(i), then the sum of Rs. 262,02,26,125 has to be allowed as deduction for the AY 2014-15 as the TDS has been paid during the previous year 2013-14 Allowability of deduction u/s 35(2AB) Wipro Ltd v CIT 382 ITR 179 (Karnataka) on for a sum of Rs. 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1477/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1481/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1476/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1483/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1478/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1475/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1479/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1484/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1480/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

M/S. ROTARY ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE- 3(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1482/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayanan, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS CPC, it should have filed an appeal within thirty days from the service of such order as prescribed under section 249

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRLCE - 1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all these 4 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1296/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Dr. Divya K.J., CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Suryanarayan, AR
Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS.\n\n29. Therefore it should be clear that once the income falls in the category\ndescribed under 9(1)(vii) irrespective of the fact whether the amount paid by\nAMAT India is equal to the cost incurred by the SECONDER or not. These\nquestions are irrelevant for deciding the taxability of the income from Fees\nfor Technical Services

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE - 1(1), BENGALURU vs. APPLIED MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all these 4 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1294/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Dr. Divya K.J., CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Suryanarayan, AR
Section 133ASection 195Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS.\n\n29. Therefore it should be clear that once the income falls in the category\ndescribed under 9(1)(vii) irrespective of the fact whether the amount paid by\nAMAT India is equal to the cost incurred by the SECONDER or not. These\nquestions are irrelevant for deciding the taxability of the income from Fees\nfor Technical Services

SRI. KRISHNAPPA SATISH KUMAR,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 731/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, JCIT (DR)
Section 139Section 153ASection 153CSection 234BSection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)

TDS amount claimed by the assessee is at Rs.1,10,514/- and it Page 3 of 4 was also noted that the assessee has not paid the tax due on the returned income upto the date of deciding the appeal by the assessee which is mandatory as per section 249

KALKERE PUTTARAJU VAJRAMUNIE, ROYAL HERMITAGE, KALKERE B.O, KALKERE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) BANGALORE, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA

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

ITA 901/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

section 249(4) of the Act dismissed the appeal of the assessee as non-maintainable. 30. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 31. The learned AR before us filed a copy Form-26AS and copy of challan showing deduction or collection of TDS

KALKERE PUTTARAJU VAJRAMUNIE, ROYAL HERMITAGE, KALKERE B.O, KALKERE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) BANGALORE, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA

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

ITA 902/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69B

section 249(4) of the Act dismissed the appeal of the assessee as non-maintainable. 30. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 31. The learned AR before us filed a copy Form-26AS and copy of challan showing deduction or collection of TDS

M/S DESAI & CO.,HUBBALLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), HUBBALLI

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

ITA 152/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 249Section 250Section 36Section 40Section 40A

249[3] of the Act in the most judicious manner to promote and uphold the substantial cause of justice, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Without Prejudice the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not justified in not adjudicating all the grounds raised by the Appellant on merits which is in grave violation of principles