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.

1,903 results for “TDS”+ Section 38clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,955Delhi1,903Bangalore980Chennai591Kolkata430Hyderabad273Ahmedabad266Jaipur205Indore195Patna184Karnataka179Cochin163Raipur162Chandigarh158Pune107Surat71Lucknow68Visakhapatnam64Rajkot56Cuttack49Dehradun35Ranchi33Nagpur28Agra26Jodhpur24Guwahati21Allahabad20Amritsar19Panaji16Telangana16Varanasi14SC10Jabalpur9Kerala7Calcutta5Uttarakhand2Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Addition to Income52Section 143(3)36Section 14734TDS31Disallowance30Deduction24Section 4023Double Taxation/DTAA23Section 918Section 148

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

TDS under Section 194-I of the Act at the time such deduction had to be made. 37. The Court accordingly answers the question that has been re-framed in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the Appellant and against the Revenue. 38

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 1,903 · Page 1 of 96

...
15
Section 6815
Section 56(2)(viib)14
ITA 2480/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: Disposed
ITAT Delhi
15 Apr 2026
AY 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

38 of the Act - tax is deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B on such expenditure and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid during the previous year. It is respectfully submitted that the said section is not applicable in case of short- deduction of 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 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

38 of the Act - tax is deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B on such expenditure and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid during the previous year. It is respectfully submitted that the said section is not applicable in case of short- deduction of 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: 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

38 of the Act - tax is deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B on such expenditure and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid during the previous year. It is respectfully submitted that the said section is not applicable in case of short- deduction of TDS

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 195 of the Act. 11.1 The Assessee during the course of the argument of this appeal, with regard to selection of comparables for determination of Arm‟s Length Price, only agitated/pressed the grounds relating to inclusion of (i) TCS E-serve Ltd. (in short „TCS‟) and (ii) eClerx Services Ltd. (in short „eClerx‟) and for making

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

TDS, therefore, A.O. 25 ITA.No.301/Del./2018 M/s. KGL Network (P) Ltd., Delhi. disallowed the same under section 40(a)(i) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee-company, however, submitted that for invoking Section 40(a)(i) of the I.T. Act, the A.O. should establish that assessee-company has made a claim of deduction of expenses under sections

ACIT, DELHI vs. M/S. THE INDIAN NEWS PAPER SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

ITA 116/DEL/2017[2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Garg, Sr. DR
Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)

Section 194-1 on payments made to MMRDA inasmuch as:- a) decision dated 10.12.2015 of jurisdictional Delhi High Court in Respondent- Assessee's own case dismissing departmental appeal nos. ITA 918 and 920 of 2015 for earlier assessment years is completely and absolutely on all fours on facts as well as in law with that obtaining in current Assessment Year

EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (TDS), NOIDA

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4214/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT( DR)
Section 10Section 11Section 201(1)

38) it is clear that every statutorily recognized provided fund is recognized provided fund, but every recognized provided fund is not statutorily recognized. (3) The assessee’s EPF was governed by the provisions of section 10(11) of the I.T. Act and thus, such payments to the employee were exempt from income-tax, having no liability for TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 120/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 201 of 38 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 the Income Tax Act were passed by the ITO TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 119/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 201 of 38 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 the Income Tax Act were passed by the ITO TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 118/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 201 of 38 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 the Income Tax Act were passed by the ITO TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2467/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 201 of 38 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 the Income Tax Act were passed by the ITO TDS

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2466/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 201 of 38 I.T.As. No. 118, 119, 120, 2466, 2467/DEL/2019 the Income Tax Act were passed by the ITO TDS

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

ITA 5816/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, SrFor Respondent: Sh. NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)
Section 201Section 254Section 40

TDS on payments made to residents as specified in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the disallowance shall be restricted to 30% of the amount of expenditure claimed. Further, existing provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act provides that certain payments such as interest, commission, brokerage, rent, royalty fee for technical services and contract payment made

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1365/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

38,72,290/- being 20% of brand building expenses of Rs.251,93,611,449/- is concerned, the ld.CIT(A), following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 and 2005-06, deleted the addition. ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 11. So far as the disallowance of reimbursement of trade scheme to promoters amounting to Rs.63

ACIT, CC- 31, NEW DELHI vs. PERNOD RICHARD INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1607/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

38,72,290/- being 20% of brand building expenses of Rs.251,93,611,449/- is concerned, the ld.CIT(A), following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 and 2005-06, deleted the addition. ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 11. So far as the disallowance of reimbursement of trade scheme to promoters amounting to Rs.63

PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2366/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

38,72,290/- being 20% of brand building expenses of Rs.251,93,611,449/- is concerned, the ld.CIT(A), following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 and 2005-06, deleted the addition. ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 11. So far as the disallowance of reimbursement of trade scheme to promoters amounting to Rs.63

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2601/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: H.K. Choudhary, CIT, DR
Section 92C

38,72,290/- being 20% of brand building expenses of Rs.251,93,611,449/- is concerned, the ld.CIT(A), following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 and 2005-06, deleted the addition. ITA No.1365,1379/Del/2018 & 2366/Del/2019 11. So far as the disallowance of reimbursement of trade scheme to promoters amounting to Rs.63

ASSERTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4200/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 40

TDS u/s 194-IA does not cover u/s 40(a)(ia) for AY 2014-15\n\nSection 40(a)(ia) as applicable to AY 2014-15 is as under-\n\"Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 38

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -XIII vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

ITA/65/2013HC Delhi01 Jul 2013
Section 194JSection 40

TDS before the due date, in such cases, notwithstanding Sections 30 to 38 of the Act, deduction is to be allowed