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.

29 results for “section 68”+ Section 194Hclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai113Delhi85Chennai29Kolkata27Bangalore26Hyderabad17Rajkot11Ahmedabad10Pune7Indore6Jaipur6Surat3Chandigarh3Cuttack2Karnataka1Nagpur1Jodhpur1Raipur1Ranchi1Lucknow1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 4045Section 194H32TDS29Section 19528Section 528Addition to Income20Section 201(1)18Deduction16Disallowance16Section 3

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2804/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

14
Section 2638
Section 133A8

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 754/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 755/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1644/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 377/CHNY/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1415/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 376/CHNY/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

section 194H of the Act and the details are as under: Name of the assessee Financial Asstt. Amount year Year Vodafone Cellular Limited 2010-11 2011-12 ₹. 62,99,76,316/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 57,74,75,884/- 2012-13 2013-14 ₹. 70,63,18,209/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 39,06,80,121/- Vodafone South Limited

KRISHNASWAMY YOGANANDAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 774/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR V. Sreenivasan
Section 194HSection 40

section 194H of Income Tax Act,1961 or not? B) Whether the assesee is correct in deducting TDS @10% on the sum of Rs.1,13,34,693/- and not deducting the TDS on the remaining sum of Rs. 68

KONDA SRINIVASAIYER DAMODHARAN KISHORI LAL ,MADURAI vs. PCIT-1, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 290/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 290/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Konda Srinivasaiyer The Principal Commissioner Of Damodharan Kishori Lal, V. Income Tax-1, No. 17 & 18, Kakathoppu Madurai. Street, Madurai – 625 001. [Pan: Afbpk-6965-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Choradia, Aca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40Section 68

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and also disallowance of 50% of sale promotional expenses. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings by the PCIT, Madurai-1, and a show cause notice u/s. 263 of the Act dated 03.02.2022 was served on the assessee. In the said show cause notice, the PCIT had taken up the issue

JCIT, COIMBATORE vs. CHROMA PRINT INDIA PVT . LTD., COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 2083/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No.2083/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Joint Commissioner Of M/S. Chroma Print India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Tds Range, Vs. P.B. No. 5316, 53, Ganesh Nagar, Coimbatore. G.N. Mills Post, Mtp Road, Coimbatore. [Pan:Aaccc6021A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Veni Raj, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore Dated 30.03.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds In Its Appeal: “1. The Order Of Learned Cit(A) Is Opposed To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That No Penalty Is Leviable On The Non Deduction Of Tds On Payment Of Labour Charges Worth

For Appellant: Ms. Veni Raj, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate
Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 273

68,415/- was paid on 26.10.2012 (post inspection) and the balance of ₹.1,60,585/- was not deducted, which attracts penalty under section 271C of the Act. 6.1 On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty on the ground that the TDS was made in the subsequent year and remitted into the Government account and moreover, the directors

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

section 201(1A) as under: Tax due u/s. Demand u/s 201(1) Interest u/s 201(1A) Total tax payable 194H ₹.6,14,879/- ₹.10,53,905/- ₹.16,68

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

section 201(1A) as under: Tax due u/s. Demand u/s 201(1) Interest u/s 201(1A) Total tax payable 194H ₹.6,14,879/- ₹.10,53,905/- ₹.16,68

CHINNUSAMY SATHYA ,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , NAMAKKAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1331/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1331 & 1332/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Chinnusamy Sathya, Income Tax Officer, No.9-119 Aathikattur, Anangur Post, Ward-2, Thiruchengode-Tk, Namakkal Namakkal, Tamil Nadu-637 304. [Pan: Ddqps3730F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 144Section 148Section 194HSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 194H of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has received Commission or Brokerage income of Rs.36,16,396/- from Aliceblue Commodities Pvt. Ltd. On which TDS of Rs.3,61,638/- has been deducted. However, assessee has not filed return of income for the relevant assessment year evading the tax as alleged. The assessee did not appear in assessment

CHINNUSAMY SATHYA,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, NAMAKKAL

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1332/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1331 & 1332/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Chinnusamy Sathya, Income Tax Officer, No.9-119 Aathikattur, Anangur Post, Ward-2, Thiruchengode-Tk, Namakkal Namakkal, Tamil Nadu-637 304. [Pan: Ddqps3730F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 : घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 144Section 148Section 194HSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 194H of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has received Commission or Brokerage income of Rs.36,16,396/- from Aliceblue Commodities Pvt. Ltd. On which TDS of Rs.3,61,638/- has been deducted. However, assessee has not filed return of income for the relevant assessment year evading the tax as alleged. The assessee did not appear in assessment

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1620/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

section 194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1759/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

section 194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1350/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

section 194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1366/CHNY/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

section 194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2276/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

section 194H of the Act to payments made by the assessee to hospitals through third party administrators. However, as per CBDT circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009, it is very clear that services rendered by hospitals to various patients of primarily medical services and therefore, provisions of section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals