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.

5,401 results for “TDS”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,816Delhi5,401Bangalore2,605Chennai2,203Kolkata1,839Pune1,422Ahmedabad1,140Hyderabad869Cochin757Patna747Indore731Jaipur671Chandigarh551Karnataka443Nagpur390Cuttack365Raipur359Visakhapatnam316Surat257Rajkot228Lucknow184Amritsar165Ranchi138Jodhpur134Dehradun93Agra86Jabalpur85Panaji84Guwahati76Telangana68Allahabad67Varanasi26SC25Calcutta21Kerala17Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana5J&K5Orissa4Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 234E92Addition to Income54TDS54Deduction46Section 200A33Section 143(3)31Section 15427Disallowance27Section 194C23Section 201(1)

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 2478/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

deduction of TDS and short deduction of TDS with respect to the payments mentioned above. - On payments totalling to Rs. 62,04,815/- TDS

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 2479/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 5,401 · Page 1 of 271

...
19
Section 14A18
Section 19417
ITAT Delhi
15 Apr 2026
AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

deduction of TDS and short deduction of TDS with respect to the payments mentioned above. - On payments totalling to Rs. 62,04,815/- TDS

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 2480/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

deduction of TDS and short deduction of TDS with respect to the payments mentioned above. - On payments totalling to Rs. 62,04,815/- TDS

HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGES vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in the above terms, but in the circumstances, with

ITA/194/2004HC Delhi01 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271

deduct TDS or deposit TDS that has been deducted. The said provision reads as under: “271-C. Penalty for failure

KGL NETWORK (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 14(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 301/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Priyansh Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-D.R
Section 234ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 44B

deducts TDS. It is not a case of no profit, therefore, TDS is required to be deducted. The assessee- company

M/S. HONDA CARS INDIA LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2056/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 40

deduct TDS and therefore in whose case there would be no disallowance of the payment as deduction because TDS was not deducted

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4157/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

deduction of TDS and on account of short deduction of TDS. With respect to non-deduction of TDS, the Learned

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4158/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

deduction of TDS and on account of short deduction of TDS. With respect to non-deduction of TDS, the Learned

SANJAY GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 70(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Ld

ITA 1031/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmasanjay Gupta, Vs. Ito, 402, Mahagun Mosaic Phase-1, Ward-70(1), Sector-4, Sahibabad, New Delhi Ghaziabad Pan : Aaepg2995G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)

deduction of TDS and deposition of TDS to Govt.’s A/c. The EIEL had deducted TDS of employees from top to lower

M/S HONDA CARS IMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIOT, NEW DELHI

ITA 375/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT DR
Section 147Section 40

deduct TDS and therefore in whose case there would be no disallowance of the payment as deduction because TDS was not deducted

USHA SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal and stay application of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6564/DEL/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 194Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS was not deducted by her. According to her, TDS could not be deducted, and was therefore not deducted and as such

SERCO INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1432/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrianil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C

deducted the TDS. Secondly such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid on or before

LINKEDIN TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI -4 , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2492/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nethrapal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 263Section 40

deduct TDS and therefore in whose case there would be no disallowance of the payment as deduction because TDS was not deducted

KAPOOR WATCH COMPANY PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRLCE-75(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 889/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O. P. Kant & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 889/Del/2020 (A.Y 2011-12) (Through Video Conferencing) Kapoor Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit G-7, South Extension, Part-1, Circle-75(1) New Delhi New Delhi Aaack3885A (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv & Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

TDS deductible or not and, if deductible under which Section TDS has to be deducted depend on nature receipt of payee/recipient

DCIT, DELHI vs. MKF LOGISTICS PVT LTD, DELHI

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

ITA 3056/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit, Vs. Mkf Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. E/63B, South Extension Part 1, New Delhi – 110 049. (Pan : Aaacm5865E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate Shri Saksham Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 04.02.2025 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.31,32,270/- On 10.09.2016. The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under Cass, Accordingly Notices Under Section 143(2)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194C

TDS deducted. Further he observed that to the extent of gross receipts of Rs.56,31,716/- wherein no TDS was deducted

DCIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. DLF PROJECTS LTD., GURGAON

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5178/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Dlf Projects Ltd. Circle 1(1), (Formerly Dt Projects Ltd.), Vs Gurgaon. 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Arjun Nagar, Dlf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon. (Pan: Aaccd3093R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/Shri R.S. Singhvi, Satyejeet, CAs
Section 192Section 195Section 40

TDS was deducted by the respondent but TDS was deducted by LOR Cyprus u/s 192 of the Act. The assessing

M/S. LUXMI RICE MILLS,KARNAL vs. ITO, KARNAL

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

ITA 1497/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini:Asstt. Yrs: 2010-11 Luxmi Rice Mills, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, C/O Dharam Pal Gupta, Adv. Ward-4, Karnal. 7-Railway Road, Karnal. Pan: Aaafl 2868 D ( Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Permil Goel AdvFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Jaiswal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 143(1)Section 194Section 194CSection 40Section 40a

deduct TDS. Similarly TDS on payment of Rs.237757/- to NBHC a banking concern was not required as per our bonafide

PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1821/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Parsvnath Developers Ltd., Vs Jcit, Parsvnath Tower, Range-76, Near Shahdara Metro Station, New Delhi.. New Delhi – 110 032. Pan: Aaacp0743J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Paritosh Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri Paritosh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr.DR
Section 194CSection 194ISection 197Section 271C

TDS return, due to which the department has calculated liability to deduct TDS @ 20% while the appellant has deducted TDS

AMIT YADAV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 44(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 3257/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 40

deduction of TDS would result in disallowance of expenditure or which such TDS was deductible. In the present case tax was deducted

LT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6221/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT- DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 92C

deducted TDS or there is a shortfall in deduction of TDS while making payment to various concerns and further held