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.

380 results for “TDS”+ Section 234E(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune720Chennai523Patna466Indore416Bangalore390Cochin380Delhi339Mumbai185Nagpur131Hyderabad110Visakhapatnam91Jaipur58Cuttack56Raipur46Amritsar37Kolkata33Ahmedabad33Ranchi32Jabalpur31Karnataka26Rajkot26Dehradun26Surat17Chandigarh16Lucknow15Jodhpur15Allahabad12Agra12Panaji11Guwahati6

Key Topics

Section 234E202Section 200A(1)109TDS92Section 20080Section 200A77Section 234E(1)66Limitation/Time-bar45Section 206C39Deduction39Section 200(3)

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 236/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

Showing 1–20 of 380 · Page 1 of 19

...
34
Section 19234
Condonation of Delay6

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

ITA 240/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 242/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 239/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 238/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 241/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

TDS statements was on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. So much so, the delay ought not to have been penalized by imposition of late filing fee under Section 234E. E: Without prejudice to the above, the appellant may point out that though Section 234E was introduced from 2012 onwards, the demand of such late filing

DHUSAN MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANNUR, KERALA vs. ITO, KANNUR, KERALA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 287/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Riju AC, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 206CSection 234Section 234ESection 234E(3)

TDS return. It is next contended that levy of interest u/s 234E of the Act is not a mandatory in all cases. However, the ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of CPC. 4. Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. 5. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before

DHUSAN MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANNUR, KERALA vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KANNUR, KERALA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 288/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Riju AC, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 206CSection 234Section 234ESection 234E(3)

TDS return. It is next contended that levy of interest u/s 234E of the Act is not a mandatory in all cases. However, the ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of CPC. 4. Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. 5. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 887/COCH/2022[QUARTER-IV 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

3) of section 206C.” 9. Interpreting Section 200A and Section 234E, the Karnataka High Court has held in Fatheraj that when the statute confers no express power under section 200A before 01.06.2015 on the authority either to compute and collect any fee under section 234E, the demand for the period before 01.06.2015 could not be sustained. Fatheraj in fact observes

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS & TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/COCH/2022[QUARTER-II 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

3) of section 206C.” 9. Interpreting Section 200A and Section 234E, the Karnataka High Court has held in Fatheraj that when the statute confers no express power under section 200A before 01.06.2015 on the authority either to compute and collect any fee under section 234E, the demand for the period before 01.06.2015 could not be sustained. Fatheraj in fact observes

ANUMOD VISHWAMBHARAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO TDS WARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 79/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 78/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 79/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Anumod Viswambharan बनाम/ Ito Tc 8/2164, Cheruvikal, Tds Ward, Aayakar Vs. Medical College, Bhavan, Peroorkada Thiruvananthapuram- Road, Kowdiar, 695011. Thiruvananthapuram. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adjpv0729M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 201Section 234E

3) of section 206C.” 9. Interpreting Section 200A and Section 234E, the Karnataka High Court has held in Fatheraj that when the statute confers no express power under section 200A before 01.06.2015 on the authority either to compute and collect any fee under section 234E, the demand for the period before 01.06.2015 could not be sustained. Fatheraj in fact observes

ANUMOD VISHWAMBHARAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO TDS WARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 78/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 78/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 79/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Anumod Viswambharan बनाम/ Ito Tc 8/2164, Cheruvikal, Tds Ward, Aayakar Vs. Medical College, Bhavan, Peroorkada Thiruvananthapuram- Road, Kowdiar, 695011. Thiruvananthapuram. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adjpv0729M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 201Section 234E

3) of section 206C.” 9. Interpreting Section 200A and Section 234E, the Karnataka High Court has held in Fatheraj that when the statute confers no express power under section 200A before 01.06.2015 on the authority either to compute and collect any fee under section 234E, the demand for the period before 01.06.2015 could not be sustained. Fatheraj in fact observes

M/S.TRAVEL TRAILS INDIA P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT,, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 168/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Vinod Haridas, FCAFor Respondent: Sri.B.Sajjive, Sr.AR
Section 200ASection 234E

3 M/s.Travel Trails India Pvt Ltd. Tax,CPC-TDS,Ghaziabad [2019] 104 taxmann.com 372 in which Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) stating that no computation of fee for delay filing of TDS return while processing TDS returns under section 234E

THE HEAD MISTRESS, AKILIYATH LP SCHOOL,KANNUR vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed

ITA 145/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 201Section 234E

3 The Headmistress AV High School. authority. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and observed that in view of the provisions of section 200A and 234E of the I.T.Act, the assessee was liable for the levy of fee u/s 234E for the delayed filing of TDS

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 992/COCH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 988/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 985/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 984/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 991/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 994/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

section 234E of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the delayed filing of the quarterly TDS returns/statements (in Form 24Q & 26Q) for FY 2015-16 to FY 2018-19, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his separate orders dated 30.08.2022. 2. The appeals raising a common issue, were taken up together