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.

193 results for “TDS”+ Section 251clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi398Mumbai348Bangalore193Raipur105Kolkata91Karnataka86Chennai77Ahmedabad58Jaipur53Chandigarh47Hyderabad42Lucknow28Surat24Pune24Nagpur24Indore12Rajkot11Visakhapatnam9Panaji9Amritsar8Dehradun7Kerala5Cuttack5Cochin5Telangana2Jodhpur2Guwahati2Ranchi2Allahabad1Patna1Agra1Rajasthan1Jabalpur1SC1

Key Topics

Addition to Income51Section 24844Section 143(3)39Disallowance36TDS29Deduction29Section 4023Section 234E22Section 14A16Section 234B

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BIOCON LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 1251/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-1 (D.R)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

TDS under Section 195 of the Act and for disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Consequently, Grounds 1 to 4 of the assessee's appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. Grounds 5 to 11 – Deduction u/s.10B and 10AA of the Act and denial of carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation. 7.1.1 These grounds (supra) are raised

Showing 1–20 of 193 · Page 1 of 10

...
16
Section 201(1)16
Section 20114

M/S AD2PRO MEDIA SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the 14 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 490/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia & Shri P.K.Gadale(Ita Nos.490 To 503(Bang)/2019) (Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ad2Pro Media Solutions Pvt.Ltd., No.10, 2Nd Floor, Bannerghatta Road, J.P.Nagar-Iii Phase, Bangalore-560078 Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle-1(1), Bmtc Building, Koramangala, Bangalore-560095 Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Vandana Sagar, CIT-DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9

251 of the Act and further violating the principles of natural justice. (V) Without prejudice, hold that the Marketing Fee paid by the Appellant to AMSI falls within the exception provided under Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act and consequentially not liable to TDS

PACHISIA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2669/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

PACHISIA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2670/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

PACHISIA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KANAKPURA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2666/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

PACHISIA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KANAKAPURA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2668/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

MANOJ KUMAR JAISWAL ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2658/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

LALIT KUMAR DOSI ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAIABAD

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

ITA 2675/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

LALIT KUMAR DOSI ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2660/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

LALITH KUMAR DOSI ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2676/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

PACHISIA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KANAKAPURA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2667/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E. Considering this the Hon. Bombay High Court had held (already discussed supra) that this is nothing but a privilege and a special service to the deductor allowing him to file the TDS return/statements beyond the time prescribed by the Act and/or the Rules. Thus, this argument no. 3 is also rejected.” 8. The next argument

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS CPC , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2685/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2686/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2689/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , BANGALORE

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

ITA 2688/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2690/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2691/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

SAROJA VASANTH ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC TDS , GHAZIBAD

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

ITA 2687/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.K.Haritha, Addl.CIT
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

TDS filed u/s. 200(3) as non est. The Tribunal also held that in appeal against an order u/s.200A of the Act, the provision of law applicable, in so far as the powers of CIT(A) in an appeal u/s.200A of the Act, was clause (c) of section 251

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

TDS credit AO to verify and allow Foreign tax credit of Rs. 96,55,80,804 includes an amount of Rs. 68,14,32,706 which is under dispute before the Australian Tax Authorities. As per section 155(14A) read with rule 128(4), tax credit should be allowed in respect of disputed foreign tax once the same is settled

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 AO as per section 197 of the Act in order to understand its tax liability. 4.2 Specific observation by the AO with respect to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act 4.2.1 The AO in the penalty order has confirmed that the Assessee has ‘concealed’ particulars of income under section