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.

342 results for “TDS”+ Section 250(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,485Delhi843Bangalore572Kolkata440Chennai342Pune295Raipur275Ahmedabad249Patna193Hyderabad162Jaipur154Cochin120Nagpur105Chandigarh102Karnataka85Indore78Rajkot74Lucknow73Amritsar72Surat67Visakhapatnam46Guwahati43Panaji41Cuttack32Jodhpur27Jabalpur22Agra20Ranchi17Dehradun15Allahabad10Varanasi6SC3Telangana3Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 14A71Section 4068Addition to Income58Section 143(3)55TDS55Disallowance50Deduction40Section 80H36Section 25031Section 80

ALFHA COACH BUILDERS,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all six these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 33/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 32 & 33/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Alfha Coach Builders, The Income Tax Officer, Sf No.596’3, Andan Kovil East, Vs. Ward -1, Pudhur, Covai Road, Karur. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaofa-8970-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) dated 13.06.2024 is erroneous, bad in law, and was passed ignoring the facts and merits of the case. B. For that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that late fee u/s 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) for a period prior to 01.06.2015 is not leviable, even

Showing 1–20 of 342 · Page 1 of 18

...
30
Section 14828
Section 19523

ALFHA COACH BUILDERS,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all six these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 32 & 33/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Alfha Coach Builders, The Income Tax Officer, Sf No.596’3, Andan Kovil East, Vs. Ward -1, Pudhur, Covai Road, Karur. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaofa-8970-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) dated 13.06.2024 is erroneous, bad in law, and was passed ignoring the facts and merits of the case. B. For that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that late fee u/s 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) for a period prior to 01.06.2015 is not leviable, even

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2015/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q2)-24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2020/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q3)-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2016/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q3)-24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2017/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q4)-24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2018/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q2)-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 2019/CHNY/2018[2013-14(Q3)-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Ms. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

6 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 into various aspects of the issue, we make reference to the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill, 2015, under which the heading was rationalization of provisions relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). The said memorandum categorically recognized that under the existing provisions of the Act, after processing of TDS

VNC STEEL DISTRIBUTORS,,KARUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), TRICHY

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

ITA 1937/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1937/Chny/2024 & Stay Petition No: 40/Chny/2024 [In Ita No: 1937/Chny/2024)] िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vnc Steel Distributors, Deputy Commissioner Of No.2, Industrial Estate, V. Income Tax, S. Vellalapatti, Circle -1(1), Karur – 639 004. Trichy. [Pan: Aadfv-9137-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Abhinov Vaidyanathan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Abhinov Vaidyanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 194CSection 194HSection 2Section 250Section 253(1)Section 30Section 40

250 of the IT Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('Ld. CIT(A)'), National Faceless Appeal Centre for the Assessment Year ('AY') 2017-18. Issue 1: Disallowance of Rs.3,03,99,796/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act in respect of incentives provided to dealers for reason that tax was not deducted under Section

SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2385/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri N Arjun Raj, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 153(3)Section 254

TDS under 5 I.T.A. Nos.2385 & 2557/Chny/18 & C.O. No.88/Chny/19 section 194A of the Act. Against the appeal filed by the Revenue, the assessee has also filed Cross Objection. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, the ITAT in I.T.A. No. 2260/Mds/2012 & CO No. 30/Mds/2013

ITO TDS WARD, TIRUPUR vs. SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., TIRUPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2557/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri N Arjun Raj, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 153(3)Section 254

TDS under 5 I.T.A. Nos.2385 & 2557/Chny/18 & C.O. No.88/Chny/19 section 194A of the Act. Against the appeal filed by the Revenue, the assessee has also filed Cross Objection. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, the ITAT in I.T.A. No. 2260/Mds/2012 & CO No. 30/Mds/2013

BHAVANI DISTILLERIS AND CHEMICALS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 814/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 68/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 888/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3055/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1571/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1584/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

250*64,45,00,000 / 1000 = 16,11,25,000 ITA No.68/Mds/2012, 1584/Mds/2014 ITA Nos. 1571 & 3055/Mds/2016 7.1 The Ld.AO opined that since the assessee had not deducted ‘tax at source’ on the expense claimed for Rs.16,11,25,000/-, provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act will be applicable and therefore disallowed the entire expenditure claimed

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 1421/CHNY/2016[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principles of equity and natural justice. 2. Treatment of compensation as interest income 2.1 The learned

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 663/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principles of equity and natural justice. 2. Treatment of compensation as interest income 2.1 The learned

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

ITA 1973/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Chennai21 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and is in violation of principles of equity and natural justice. 2. Treatment of compensation as interest income 2.1 The learned