Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

2,863 results for “TDS”+ Section 25clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,927 Delhi2,863 Bangalore1,561 Chennai1,050 Kolkata669 Ahmedabad514 Hyderabad440 Pune404 Indore290 Jaipur277 Cochin270 Chandigarh233 Raipur225 Karnataka195 Surat121 Nagpur106 Rajkot96 Cuttack92 Visakhapatnam81 Lucknow77 Amritsar46 Jodhpur44 Dehradun42 Ranchi39 Guwahati38 Agra30 Allahabad29 Kerala26 Telangana26 Panaji25 Patna22 SC12 Jabalpur11 Varanasi10 Calcutta7 Rajasthan5 Uttarakhand2 Orissa2 Bombay1 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)46 Addition to Income43 Disallowance30 Section 4025 Deduction24 Section 6822 Section 14721 TDS21 Section 26318 Section 14A

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

25. The order passed under Section 201 (1) is not an assessment order. The order is directed against a person who fails to deduct 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 2478/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi

Showing 1–20 of 2,863 · Page 1 of 144

...

15

Double Taxation/DTAA14

Section 144C(13)12

15 Apr 2026

AY 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

25 of 38 expenditure being in connection with or pertaining to income which does not form part of the total income under the said Act. 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning the exempted income, there could not be any disallowance under section 14A. While we agree that the expression “expenditure incurred” refers

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: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 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

25 of 38 expenditure being in connection with or pertaining to income which does not form part of the total income under the said Act. 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning the exempted income, there could not be any disallowance under section 14A. While we agree that the expression “expenditure incurred” refers

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

25 of 38 expenditure being in connection with or pertaining to income which does not form part of the total income under the said Act. 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning the exempted income, there could not be any disallowance under section 14A. While we agree that the expression “expenditure incurred” refers

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 6257/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Acharya, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 6258/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Acharya, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25

YAMUNA KHADAR SHIKSHA SAMITI,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, all the Eleven appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 6259/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri A.N. Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Acharya, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 25

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE 76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 452/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

25,07,038 as rent liable for TDS under section under section 194I of the Act. Hence, the TDS liability

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 577/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

25,07,038 as rent liable for TDS under section under section 194I of the Act. Hence, the TDS liability

SUMITA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 577/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

25,07,038 as rent liable for TDS under section under section 194I of the Act. Hence, the TDS liability

R V INTERIOR PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 452/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

25,07,038 as rent liable for TDS under section under section 194I of the Act. Hence, the TDS liability

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1027/DEL/2020[2015-16 24Q, (Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

25 W Serve Technologies Pvt. Ltd. invalidate the proceedings of processing of TDS return or levy of fees under section

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1040/DEL/2020[2013-14 (26Q-Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

25 W Serve Technologies Pvt. Ltd. invalidate the proceedings of processing of TDS return or levy of fees under section

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

TDS under section 192 of the Act and therefore, the case of the Assessee does not fall under twin parameters set out in the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. In this regard, the Assessee relied upon various judgments 25

EBNOY HOMES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 74(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1101/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234Section 234ESection 271Section 271H

TDS, because the payments made to each seller was less than the prescribed limit of Rs.50 lacs and therefore, provision of section 194IA was not applicable. The demand has been raised by the department u/s 200 in terms of failure to comply with Section 200A, which deals 25

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

ITA 21/DEL/2015[2006-07 (F.Y.- 2005-06)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CA

Section 133ASection 192Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

25&26/Del/2015 section 253, there is a mention of an appeal against the order passed by the CIT u/s 250, which obviously refers to a common appellate order passed against order under sub- sections (1) and (1A) of section 201 of the Act. This shows that the law requires passing of one order by the AO(TDS

M/S. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

ITA 4791/DEL/2011[2006-07 (F.Y. 2005-06)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CA

Section 133ASection 192Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

25&26/Del/2015 section 253, there is a mention of an appeal against the order passed by the CIT u/s 250, which obviously refers to a common appellate order passed against order under sub- sections (1) and (1A) of section 201 of the Act. This shows that the law requires passing of one order by the AO(TDS

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

ITA 5347/DEL/2011[2006-07 (F.Y. 2005-06)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2016

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CA

Section 133ASection 192Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

25&26/Del/2015 section 253, there is a mention of an appeal against the order passed by the CIT u/s 250, which obviously refers to a common appellate order passed against order under sub- sections (1) and (1A) of section 201 of the Act. This shows that the law requires passing of one order by the AO(TDS

BATHLINE INDIA (PVT.) LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 9341/DEL/2019[2013-14 (26Q,Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 54

25. We find, the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the following decisions also have held that no fee can be levied u/s 234E in terms of section 200A where the date of filing of TDS

BATHLINE INDIA (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT - CPC, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 9336/DEL/2019[2013-14 (24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 54

25. We find, the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the following decisions also have held that no fee can be levied u/s 234E in terms of section 200A where the date of filing of TDS