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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 234E(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune643Chennai523Patna466Bangalore388Cochin367Delhi314Mumbai183Indore153Nagpur122Visakhapatnam77Hyderabad42Kolkata33Jaipur32Raipur28Karnataka26Jabalpur24Dehradun24Amritsar19Surat17Lucknow13Cuttack13Panaji11Ahmedabad10Rajkot9Agra9Chandigarh6Guwahati6Jodhpur3Ranchi2

Key Topics

Section 234E21Section 200A8TDS6Section 1942Section 2012Section 2342Section 1952Deduction2

SH. SAURABH KAUSHIK,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 312/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: The Disposal Of The Same.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal., CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 194ISection 195Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

TDS statement as prescribed in sec. 200 of the Act. Therefore, as mandated by the statute u/s 234E r.w.s. 200A of the Act, the AO has correctly charged the default and the consequential levy of late filing fees under section 234E of the Act. 7.2 Section 200A(1

BATRA EXPORTS,FAZILKA vs. DCIT, |TDS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 38/CHANDI/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri J.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

TDS returns. That the late fees detail for Form No. 26Q is as under: Amount Section FY Quarter Due Date Date of filing i) Rs. 90400/- 234E 2013-14/Q2 15.10.2013 03.01.2015 ii) Rs. 37,886/- 234E 2013-14/Q4 31.05.2014 02.01.2015 3. That the assessee filed the first appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi which was dismissed

BATRA EXPORTS,FAZILKA vs. DCIT, |TDS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 35/CHANDI/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri J.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

TDS returns. That the late fees detail for Form No. 26Q is as under: Amount Section FY Quarter Due Date Date of filing i) Rs. 90400/- 234E 2013-14/Q2 15.10.2013 03.01.2015 ii) Rs. 37,886/- 234E 2013-14/Q4 31.05.2014 02.01.2015 3. That the assessee filed the first appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi which was dismissed

HP AGRO INDUSTRIES CORP. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), VAISHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1072/CHANDI/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1072/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S H.P. Agro Industries The Asstt. Cit, बनाम Corporation Ltd., Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Plot No. 8, Bangluru Pesticide Unit, Parwanoo (H.P) "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Ptlh11428E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Through Video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 200(1)(c)Section 200A(1)Section 234E

1) of the Act is procedural in nature and in view thereof, the Assessing Officer while processing the TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E

NAVPREET SINGH BHASIN,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, TDS-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1002/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

TDS returns for the financial years 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. It was submitted that there was no provision for levying fee under section 200A for the period prior to 01.06.2015 and the same was subsequently inserted in section 200A(1)(c) with prospective effect from 01.06.2015. Therefore, the fee levied under section 234E

STYLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 1152/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ravinder Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234E

Section 194-IA, assessee was supposed to deduct TDS on payments exceeding Rs.50 lacs for purchase of land or building except agriculture land. This TDS was to be deducted @ 1%, thus, according to the AO, assessee failed to deduct the TDS. Therefore, he worked out a default of Rs.1,25,546/- u/s 201(1) and charged interest