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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Section 197A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Nagpur92Chennai92Delhi59Pune30Karnataka26Bangalore25Kolkata22Mumbai15Cochin14Jaipur8Hyderabad7Cuttack6Panaji6Jodhpur4Ahmedabad3Agra2Lucknow2Chandigarh1Amritsar1Surat1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 206A12Section 408TDS7Disallowance6Deduction5Section 90(2)4Section 201(1)4Section 2014Section 197A4Section 194A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(IT)-II, HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 725/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.725/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dy. C.I.T (It)-Ii Vs. Sew Infrastructure Ltd Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aadcs4061P (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri B Bala Krishna, Cit(Dr) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT(DR)
Section 154Section 2Section 206ASection 90Section 90(2)Section 9O(2)

2) of the Act. ix. Section 206AA is substantive provision for enforcing PAN obligations and not merely a procedural/ machinery provision. x. The role of the payer/Assessee is limited to deducting tax at source as per the Act on sums chargeable to tax and that the Assessee does not have locus standi to challenge the rate of TDS applicable

4
Survey u/s 133A4
Section 1482

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. TELANGANA GRAMEENA BANK (EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S DECCAN GRAMEENA BANK), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s C

ITA 714/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 148Section 194ASection 263Section 40Section 44A

2) and 142(1) thereafter, which clearly are beyond the period of 7 years from the end of the relevant financial year in which form 15G/15H has been received by the assessee bank. The relevant financial year ends on 31.3.2008 during which the assessee had made the payments without making TDS and could have obtained forms 15G/15H. He therefore, prayed

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. TELANGANA GRAMEENA BANK(EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S DECCAN GRAMEENA BANK), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s C

ITA 485/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 148Section 194ASection 263Section 40Section 44A

2) and 142(1) thereafter, which clearly are beyond the period of 7 years from the end of the relevant financial year in which form 15G/15H has been received by the assessee bank. The relevant financial year ends on 31.3.2008 during which the assessee had made the payments without making TDS and could have obtained forms 15G/15H. He therefore, prayed

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 9/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 197ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 11/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 197ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 8/HYD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 197ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that

SAPTAGIRI GRAMEENA BANK,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, TIRUPATI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 10/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 197ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

TDS has failed and hence, the AO is right in invoking the provisions of Sec.201 (1)and Sec.201(1A) of the Act.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and submitted that