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.

61 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai684Delhi644Kolkata434Bangalore284Chennai184Ahmedabad146Jaipur114Hyderabad90Cochin75Chandigarh61Pune59Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar30Jodhpur24Surat22Patna19Panaji18Jabalpur16Lucknow16Allahabad15Ranchi14Guwahati14Agra8Kerala8Telangana7SC5Dehradun4Varanasi3Rajasthan2Calcutta2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 194C63TDS57Section 4033Deduction30Section 201(1)28Section 143(3)21Addition to Income21Section 19516Section 916Section 194H

ITO (TDS), PATIALA vs. M/S S.A. SINGH & CO., BHAWANIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 986/CHANDI/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10(24)Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 133ASection 194CSection 194C(6)Section 2(31)Section 201(1)

TDS @ 2% under Section 194C of the Act. 3.1 Thereafter, the proceedings under section 201(1) of the Act were

Showing 1–20 of 61 · Page 1 of 4

15
Disallowance15
Section 26314

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 804/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

TDS) under section 195(2) or 195(3) either by the non-resident or by the resident payer is to avoid any future hassles for both resident as well as non-resident. In our view, section 195(2) and 195(3) are safeguards. The said provisions are of practical importance. This reasoning of ours is based on the decision

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME TEXTILES INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

TDS) under section 195(2) or 195(3) either by the non-resident or by the resident payer is to avoid any future hassles for both resident as well as non-resident. In our view, section 195(2) and 195(3) are safeguards. The said provisions are of practical importance. This reasoning of ours is based on the decision

DCIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD,, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1321/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

TDS) under section 195(2) or 195(3) either by the non-resident or by the resident payer is to avoid any future hassles for both resident as well as non-resident. In our view, section 195(2) and 195(3) are safeguards. The said provisions are of practical importance. This reasoning of ours is based on the decision

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 932/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

TDS) under section 195(2) or 195(3) either by the non-resident or by the resident payer is to avoid any future hassles for both resident as well as non-resident. In our view, section 195(2) and 195(3) are safeguards. The said provisions are of practical importance. This reasoning of ours is based on the decision

VARDHMAN POLYTEX LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT(TDS), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1090/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi. Though Notices Were Issued Electronically Through The E-Filing Portal, The Assessee Contended That Such Notices Were Neither Brought To Their Knowledge Nor Received Through Any Alternative Means Such As Email Or Physical Intimation. Consequently, The Appeal Was Dismissed Ex Parte. It Was Further Submitted That The Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Is Legal In Nature & Does Not Require Examination Of Disputed Facts; Hence, The Matter May Be Adjudicated On Merits Without The Necessity Of A Remand To The Lower Authorities.

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 44A

TDS u/s 194C of the I.T Act, 1961 on the freight payments amounting to Rs.4,43,600/- made to the transporter Sh. Rohtash Kumar Banwarilal Bhadu Prop. M/s. Shree Shyam Transport Co..." The AO observed that: "The assessee submitted a declaration under Section 194C(6) but did not provide any evidence of ownership of trucks. Backend verification of ITRs

ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 686/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DCIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE CIVIL SUPPLY CORPN. LTD., SIRHIND

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 320/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 317/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

ACIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAIN PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., BARNALA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 162/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 316/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB, SANGRUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1312/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

ITO (TDS), PATIALA vs. THE DISTT. MANAGER, FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1309/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 685/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB, SANGRUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1313/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F&A) (PERSONAL RESPONSIBLE),SHIMLA vs. ITO (TDS), SHIMLA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1424/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

ITO, CHANDIGARH vs. THE MANAGER DISTT. OFFICE,, MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1241/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY,ROPAR vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 669/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB,

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1314/CHANDI/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS

THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F&A) (PERSONAL RESPONSIBLE),SHIMLA vs. ITO (TDS), SHIMLA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

ITA 1425/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

1 A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee deductor applied provisions of section 194C on the cash part of the payments but not on the payments which were paid in kind and thus not deducted TDS