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.

148 results for “TDS”+ Section 6clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,907 Delhi5,750 Bangalore2,773 Chennai2,445 Kolkata1,698 Pune1,546 Ahmedabad1,245 Hyderabad1,027 Cochin798 Indore756 Jaipur715 Patna557 Chandigarh551 Raipur494 Nagpur398 Karnataka390 Visakhapatnam380 Cuttack342 Surat336 Rajkot265 Lucknow206 Amritsar179 Jabalpur148 Jodhpur129 Dehradun123 Ranchi120 Agra85 Panaji81 Guwahati79 Telangana68 Allahabad67 SC24 Varanasi23 Calcutta19 Kerala17 Rajasthan9 Himachal Pradesh8 Punjab & Haryana5 Orissa4 Uttarakhand3 J&K3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 Gauhati1 Bombay1

Key Topics

TDS91 Section 200A47 Section 234E47 Addition to Income28 Section 201(1)25 Deduction24 Section 143(3)22 Section 271C20 Section 27120 Exemption

SAURABH SINGHAI L/H LATE SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN,SAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3 SAGAR, SAGAR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5/JAB/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon‟Ble

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 263

section 194C(6) are satisfied. TDS provisions are complimentary in nature. The exemption for non-deduction of tax has been

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER , CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE ,JABALPUR vs. ITO (TDS)-2, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 148 · Page 1 of 8

...

20

ITA 4/JAB/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Shidharth Seth.Adv. ARFor Respondent: Shri.RajeshKumarGupta.Sr.DR

Section 154Section 156Section 190Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 203ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

6 That the provisions of Section 204 of the Act has made the person responsible for Section190 to Section 203AA and Section 285, this phrase does not cover Section 234E, it means no one is responsible for default U/s 234E of the Act. It also clears that if late fees are due but not deposited along with the TDS

SKYLINE AGRO PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-1,

In the result, the captioned appeals are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 235/JAB/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur02 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

Section 5(2)Section 6

TDS-1) under section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, has not been

SKYLINE AGRO PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-1,

In the result, the captioned appeals are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 237/JAB/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur02 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

Section 5(2)Section 6

TDS-1) under section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, has not been

SKYLINE AGRO PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-1,

In the result, the captioned appeals are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 236/JAB/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur02 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

Section 5(2)Section 6

TDS-1) under section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, has not been

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR vs. ORIENT PAPER MILLS PROP. M/S ORIENT PAPERS &,

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 35/JAB/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

6. The ground Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 relate to the issue whether payment made by the assessee to non-resident company are liable for deduction of tax at source (in short “TDS”) under the provisions of section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPUR vs. ORIENT PAPER MILLS PROP. M/S ORIENT PAPERS &,

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 34/JAB/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)

6. The ground Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 relate to the issue whether payment made by the assessee to non-resident company are liable for deduction of tax at source (in short “TDS”) under the provisions of section

RAJENDRA SINGH BAGGA,DAMOH vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, KATNI

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

ITA 187/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Rajendra Singh Bagga, 15 43, Tandon Vs. National Faceless Assessment Bagicha, College Road, Gayatri Nagar, Centre, Delhi [Jurisdiction Damoh, M.P. Officer-Acit Katni-Circle, Katni Pan:Adgpb8418G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, Fca Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 14.10.2024 Whereby Learned Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Orders Of The Learned Ao Under Section 147 Read With Section 144 Dated 30.03.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Are Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Ex- Party Order Without Providing Adequate Opportunity As Only Three Dates For Hearing Were Fixed & That Too In The Peak Periods Of Filling Of Tax Audits, Income Tax Returns & Accordingly Assessee Was Busy In Filling His Audit Report /Itr & Had Seeked Adjournment Also In This Regard. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Cit (A) Erred In Confirming Addition Of 6 Lacs Under Section 68, When Ao Himself Admitting In The Assessment Order That The Difference Of 5% 'Was Applicable As Allowable Difference Between Circle Rate & Actual Rate Of Purchase Of Property. Hence Forth The Addition Of Rs 6 Lacs Should Have Been Deleted By Ao.

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69

TDS thereupon; no addition under section 69 could has been made as primary requirement of section 69 state that investment should be out of books. Accordingly, addition of Rs 6

JAGANNATH DAS PREMVATI WELFARE SOCIETY,WRIGHT TOWN vs. ITO TDS-1, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 89/JAB/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR

Section 201(1)Section 250

section 201(1) of the Act, as the assessee had not made any payment on which liability of TDS arose. It was further submitted that since the assessee had not received the notices, it could not make submissions in support of such assertions before the ld. AO or the ld. CIT(A). It was, therefore, submitted that the TDS default

JAGANNATH DAS PREMVATI WELFARE SOCIETY,JABALPUR vs. ITO TDS-1, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 91/JAB/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR

Section 201(1)Section 250

section 201(1) of the Act, as the assessee had not made any payment on which liability of TDS arose. It was further submitted that since the assessee had not received the notices, it could not make submissions in support of such assertions before the ld. AO or the ld. CIT(A). It was, therefore, submitted that the TDS default

MANESSH SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME OFFICER (TDS), BHOPAL

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

ITA 102/JAB/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271Section 271C

TDS if the turnover of the individual or HUF in the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which the payment is made exceed the limit prescribed under section 44AB. Since the assessment year 2010-11 is first year of audit hence in view of the provision of these sections the 6

MANESSH SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

ITA 101/JAB/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271Section 271C

TDS if the turnover of the individual or HUF in the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which the payment is made exceed the limit prescribed under section 44AB. Since the assessment year 2010-11 is first year of audit hence in view of the provision of these sections the 6

MANESSH SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

ITA 100/JAB/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271Section 271C

TDS if the turnover of the individual or HUF in the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which the payment is made exceed the limit prescribed under section 44AB. Since the assessment year 2010-11 is first year of audit hence in view of the provision of these sections the 6

MANESSH SHARMA ,JABALPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME OFFICER (TDS), BHOPAL

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

ITA 103/JAB/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271Section 271C

TDS if the turnover of the individual or HUF in the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which the payment is made exceed the limit prescribed under section 44AB. Since the assessment year 2010-11 is first year of audit hence in view of the provision of these sections the 6

MANESSH SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

ITA 99/JAB/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271Section 271C

TDS if the turnover of the individual or HUF in the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which the payment is made exceed the limit prescribed under section 44AB. Since the assessment year 2010-11 is first year of audit hence in view of the provision of these sections the 6

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS , GHAZIABAB

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

ITA 89/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 200ASection 200CSection 231ESection 234ASection 234E

TDS return u/s. 200A of the Act. It is not in dispute that Section 200A enable the AO to do certain thing. Admittedly levy of fee is not enabled or otherwise by Parliament before 01.06.2015. Realizing the mistake, the Parliament by Finance Act, 2015 amended the Section 200A by introducing sub clause-c enabling the AO to levy

POORAN LAL VISHWAKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

ITA 87/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 200ASection 200CSection 231ESection 234ASection 234E

TDS return u/s. 200A of the Act. It is not in dispute that Section 200A enable the AO to do certain thing. Admittedly levy of fee is not enabled or otherwise by Parliament before 01.06.2015. Realizing the mistake, the Parliament by Finance Act, 2015 amended the Section 200A by introducing sub clause-c enabling the AO to levy

SHRI SHANKARLAL VISHWKARMA,KATNI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS , GHAZIABAB

In the result, all the three appeals stand allowed

ITA 88/JAB/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesanassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 200ASection 200CSection 231ESection 234ASection 234E

TDS return u/s. 200A of the Act. It is not in dispute that Section 200A enable the AO to do certain thing. Admittedly levy of fee is not enabled or otherwise by Parliament before 01.06.2015. Realizing the mistake, the Parliament by Finance Act, 2015 amended the Section 200A by introducing sub clause-c enabling the AO to levy

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 149/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

TDS was also deducted and it is duly reflecting in the Form 26AS and duly shown in the ITR and it was disallowed on frivolous grounds. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) NFAC was not justified in confirming the action of AO with regard to the deduction claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the act without

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 151/JAB/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

TDS was also deducted and it is duly reflecting in the Form 26AS and duly shown in the ITR and it was disallowed on frivolous grounds. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) NFAC was not justified in confirming the action of AO with regard to the deduction claimed by the appellant under section 80P of the act without