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.

59 results for “TDS”+ Permanent Establishmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,006Mumbai773Chennai346Bangalore265Ahmedabad148Kolkata145Karnataka120Jaipur59Cochin42Chandigarh38Pune34Indore34Raipur32Hyderabad30Dehradun27Visakhapatnam23Rajkot20Guwahati15Lucknow13Cuttack9Nagpur9Amritsar7Agra6Panaji6Jodhpur5Jabalpur5SC5Surat5Telangana5Varanasi4Uttarakhand2Patna1Kerala1

Key Topics

Addition to Income34Section 4032Section 143(3)26Section 35A25Section 26323Disallowance23TDS18Deduction16Section 153A15Section 195

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 166/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

permanent establishment in India, amount in question did not accrue or arise in India and, thus, there was no need for deducting tax at source u/s. 195- CIT(A) deleted disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of Rs.34,18,126/- holding that assessee was using services of overseas commission agent for procuring export orders and not for providing managerial/technical services attracting TDS

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

14
Section 14813
Section 13912

M/S. PRIME OCEANIC PVT. LTD. GANDHI NAGAR, UPLA SONAVA, SCHEME NO.8, ALWAR,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the disallowance so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 652/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 195Section 40

Permanent Establishment, such business income is not chargeable to tax in India. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case when the amount paid by the assessee is not chargeable to tax in India then the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS

DALAS BIOTECH LIMITED,BHIWADI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to cost

ITA 147/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv (Physical)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68

permanent establishment in India, hence the liability of TDS u/s 195 of the Act does not apply. Hence, the disallowance

MODERN THREADS (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

ITA 198/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 245R(2)Section 40

permanent establishment in India. The ld CIT(Appeals) has discussed this matter in para 6 of his order and his finding has been given in para 6.3 on page 13 wherein he has held that argument of the assessee that since the non- resident persons to whom payments were made do not have a place of business or business connection

M/S MODERN THREADS (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

ITA 199/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 245R(2)Section 40

permanent establishment in India. The ld CIT(Appeals) has discussed this matter in para 6 of his order and his finding has been given in para 6.3 on page 13 wherein he has held that argument of the assessee that since the non- resident persons to whom payments were made do not have a place of business or business connection

JC FASHIONS,JAIPUR vs. ITO (T & J), JAIPUR

In the result , the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 993/JPR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 195Section 40

permanent establishment in India. Circular No. 786, dated February 7, 2000, governs the case of the respondent-assessee as the year involved is the assessment year 2007-08 and, in our view, the Circular No. 7, dated October 22, 2009, which came into force from October 22 ,2009, cannot be said to be applicable in the facts of the instant

ISYS SOFTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. CIT (A), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 528/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 271CSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

permanent establishment in India. 7 Isys Softech Private Limited vs. ITO High Courts and finally the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in different judicial pronouncements have held that payment to non-resident, having no PE in India is not liable to Income tax in India and therefore no TDS

ACIT, ALWAR vs. KALAS BIOTECH LTD., ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 180/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sagoni (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
Section 131Section 40

TDS. He has supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 14. We have considered the rival submission as well as relevant material on record. The commission in question was paid to the non resident who was not having permanent establishment

SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, ALWAR

In the result, this Tax Case Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1122/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar &For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)Section 9(2)

TDS to be deducted if commission paid to foreign agents for rendering services abroad ITAT Chennai Bench recently held that assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source for making payment to its foreign agents for rendering services abroad, if the foreign agent does not have a permanent establishment

GILLETTE INDIA LIMITED,SPA-65A, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BHIWADI, DISTRICT- ALWAR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 313/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. ParwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 194Section 195Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

TDS is to be deducted u/s 195 of the Act and the transactions that are required to be reported in Form 3CEB. (b) not appreciating that the transactions mentioned in Form 3CEB include certain amounts which are not liable for taxation u/s 195 of the Act being in the nature of business income (not having Business connection or Permanent Establishment

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

ITA 784/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)
Section 10Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 40

permanent establishment in India. None of the person to whom the payment is made has any PE in India and therefore, the income on account of sales commission does not accrue or arises in India. Hence, section 195 is not applicable on such payment. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed that assessee has not brought any evidence on record

M/S JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1494/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Sept 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya &For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 234BSection 40

permanent establishment (PE) or any sort of business connection, directly or indirectly, in India 16. It was submitted that all these details and the evidences were admittedly submitted vide our letter dated 18.11.2015 to the AO and also before the ld. CIT(A) through a voluminous paper book. The AO examined the details thoroughly however, these facts & evidences were neither

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 979/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

establish that extra amount collected in cash by shopkeepers/retailers have been passed on further from wholesale buyers/ super buyers to the manufacturer, i.e., assessee; and once that is so, the presumption of indirect flow back cannot be made the basis for such addition or estimation of income. Various case laws have been referred by the learned counsel before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 1122/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

establish that extra amount collected in cash by shopkeepers/retailers have been passed on further from wholesale buyers/ super buyers to the manufacturer, i.e., assessee; and once that is so, the presumption of indirect flow back cannot be made the basis for such addition or estimation of income. Various case laws have been referred by the learned counsel before

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 977/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

establish that extra amount collected in cash by shopkeepers/retailers have been passed on further from wholesale buyers/ super buyers to the manufacturer, i.e., assessee; and once that is so, the presumption of indirect flow back cannot be made the basis for such addition or estimation of income. Various case laws have been referred by the learned counsel before

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 978/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

establish that extra amount collected in cash by shopkeepers/retailers have been passed on further from wholesale buyers/ super buyers to the manufacturer, i.e., assessee; and once that is so, the presumption of indirect flow back cannot be made the basis for such addition or estimation of income. Various case laws have been referred by the learned counsel before

ARGUS GOLDEN TRADES INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

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

ITA 522/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT)
Section 272A(2)(K)Section 273B

establish that mens rea was involved M/s Argus Golden Trade India Ltd. Vs. JCIT TDS, Jaipur in non submission of the same. From the table as stated below, it is evident that although there was delay in filing the e-TDS returns but the TDS was deducted at the rates prescribed by the Income Tax Department and was also deposited

DULHE RAM MEENA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 72/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 37B

establish ownership and agricultural use of the land claimed by the appellant. The contention raised by learned AR is that TDS credit has to be allowed to the person from whose income same has been deducted, notwithstanding any dispute regarding classification of income or title, particularly, when income has been declared and TDS reflected. 10. Admittedly, in his return

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 147/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Tatiwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) &
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

established but the genuineness and creditworthiness of the creditors were well proved—All the cash creditors have not only placed on record the entire material but have also affirmed in their examination that they had advanced money to the assessee from their own respective bank accounts—Finding by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the material

MARVEL SUPPORT CONSULTANCY SERVICES,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRLCE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed per ground

ITA 293/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Dec 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

permanent account number of the person to whom credit is to be given, payment or credit in relation to which credit is to be given and reasons for giving credit to such person. (iii) The deductor shall issue the certificate for deduction of tax at source in the name of the person in whose name credit is shown