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.

266 results for “TDS”+ Section 27clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,626Mumbai2,474Bangalore1,348Chennai961Pune674Kolkata620Ahmedabad504Hyderabad497Jaipur285Chandigarh266Indore264Cochin237Raipur220Karnataka191Nagpur134Visakhapatnam125Cuttack114Surat111Rajkot102Lucknow72Amritsar58Ranchi49Guwahati33Jabalpur32Dehradun30Jodhpur30Agra27Allahabad25Patna21Telangana21Panaji20SC14Kerala12Varanasi8Calcutta5Uttarakhand2Rajasthan2Gauhati1Orissa1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 26343Addition to Income38Section 143(3)35Section 153A21TDS20Deduction19Disallowance19Section 1015Section 143(2)15Section 40A(3)

M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 960/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

Showing 1–20 of 266 · Page 1 of 14

...
15
Section 142(1)14
Section 250(6)13

M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 394/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 389/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

ITA 1033/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 195Section 40Section 40ASection 5(2)Section 6Section 9(1)

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

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 under section 201(1) and demand of Rs. 58,27,591/- was determined under section 201(1) on account

SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 184/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri. Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

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 of the Act. Hence, the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all these appeals does not stand and the demand raised by way of charging the fees under section

SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 183/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri. Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

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 of the Act. Hence, the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all these appeals does not stand and the demand raised by way of charging the fees under section

SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 185/CHANDI/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri. Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

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 of the Act. Hence, the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all these appeals does not stand and the demand raised by way of charging the fees under section

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

ITA 663/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Respondent: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate

TDS) by the payer at the time of making payment for compulsory\nacquisition of immovable property other than agricultural land. It was further\ncontended that in the case of Hari Singh v. Union of India [2018] 91\ntaxmann.com 20 (SC)the issue of chargeability of interest to tax was not the\nlis before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The only

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

DCIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., PATIALA

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

ITA 318/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value

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

TDS’ on the value of the by-products paid ‘in kind’ as consideration for the milling charges. 16. On the other hand, the stand of the assessees before us is that the by-product did not constitute as a payment of consideration for the work contract of milling of the paddy. That the assessees have not debited even the value