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.

3,568 results for “TDS”+ Section 17clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,652Delhi3,568Bangalore1,861Chennai1,302Kolkata821Hyderabad545Pune477Ahmedabad442Jaipur349Indore298Karnataka264Chandigarh260Raipur255Cochin218Surat163Nagpur162Visakhapatnam152Rajkot115Lucknow87Cuttack73Amritsar62Dehradun59Ranchi53Panaji42Telangana41Patna39Jabalpur37Allahabad34Guwahati33Jodhpur26Agra25SC18Kerala12Varanasi11Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan6Calcutta6Punjab & Haryana4Uttarakhand3J&K1Orissa1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Addition to Income56Section 143(3)54Section 153A46Disallowance40Deduction28TDS28Section 201(1)26Section 4022Section 26319Section 271(1)(c)

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 441 / 2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

17 (2) is wide. If any perquisite other than a monetary benefit is granted, that provision (Section 10 (10CC) operates. If this scheme is understood in its proper perspective, it is evident, from Section 192 (1A) that a person (employer) responsible for making payment of a non-monetary perquisite, “may pay, at his option, tax on the whole or part

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

17 (2) is wide. If any perquisite other than a monetary benefit is granted, that provision (Section 10 (10CC) operates. If this scheme is understood in its proper perspective, it is evident, from Section 192 (1A) that a person (employer) responsible for making payment of a non-monetary perquisite, “may pay, at his option, tax on the whole or part

Showing 1–20 of 3,568 · Page 1 of 179

...
18
Section 14815
Section 153C14

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA-441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

17 (2) is wide. If any perquisite other than a monetary benefit is granted, that provision (Section 10 (10CC) operates. If this scheme is understood in its proper perspective, it is evident, from Section 192 (1A) that a person (employer) responsible for making payment of a non-monetary perquisite, “may pay, at his option, tax on the whole or part

CIT vs. ISAO SAKAI

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/325/2012HC Delhi17 May 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17

CIT vs. YOSHIMI KAMANO

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/326/2012HC Delhi17 May 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17

CIT vs. YUJI HORIKAWA

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/343/2012HC Delhi17 May 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17

CIT vs. YOSHIMI KAMANO

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA - 326 / 2012HC Delhi17 May 2012
Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17

CIT vs. ISAO SAKAI

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA - 325 / 2012HC Delhi17 May 2012
Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section 17

CIT vs. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD

The appeals are allowed

ITA/445/2011HC Delhi11 May 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS under Section 192 of the Act and thus, the assessees could not be treated assessees-in-default under Section 201 and consequently not liable for any interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act. It is against these orders of the Tribunal that the present appeals have been preferred by the Revenue. 5. The appeals have been admitted

CIT vs. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD

The appeals are allowed

ITA - 445 / 2011HC Delhi11 May 2011
Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS under Section 192 of the Act and thus, the assessees could not be treated assessees-in-default under Section 201 and consequently not liable for any interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act. It is against these orders of the Tribunal that the present appeals have been preferred by the Revenue. 5. The appeals have been admitted

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

17 agreement, the payments attracted TDS under Section 194-C and not Section 194-I of the Act. 24. There

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8621/DEL/2019[2013-14(Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8627/DEL/2019[2015-16 (Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8619/DEL/2019[2013-14 (Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8626/DEL/2019[2015-16(Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8629/DEL/2019[2015-16(Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8628/DEL/2019[2015-16 (Q-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8620/DEL/2019[2013-14 (Q-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8624/DEL/2019[2014-15(Q-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17

INNOVATIVE PRE- PRESS & PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 8625/DEL/2019[2014-15 (Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

TDS returns after June, Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 17