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.

75 results for “TDS”+ Section 195clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,095Mumbai1,029Bangalore604Chennai472Ahmedabad201Kolkata174Karnataka132Pune98Hyderabad88Chandigarh83Jaipur75Visakhapatnam49Indore39Rajkot33Cochin31Cuttack21Lucknow20Raipur18Dehradun16Surat10Telangana8Jabalpur8Nagpur8Jodhpur7Allahabad6Panaji5SC5Amritsar4Agra4Calcutta3Kerala2Guwahati2Patna1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)63Addition to Income61Section 4051Section 14734TDS32Disallowance27Section 26324Section 19521Section 201(1)20Survey u/s 133A

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)

TDS, in view of insertion of Explanation to Section 195 by Finance Act, 20212 with retrospective effect from 01- 04-1962. Therefore

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

Showing 1–20 of 75 · Page 1 of 4

19
Section 14A18
Deduction17

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

TDS was not done as per provisions of section 195 read with Explanation II to the said section wherein it is clarified

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

TDS was not done as per provisions of section 195 read with Explanation II to the said section wherein it is clarified

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

TDS therefore as per provisions of section 195 read with section 40(a)(ia) the expenses of Rs. Rs.1,54,37,262/- on account

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

TDS provisions. 9 M/s Prime Oceanic Pvt. Ltd., Alwar Vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Alwar During the course of assessment proceedings, Ld. AO asked the assessee about the applicability of the provisions of section 9(1)(vii)(b) and further stated that section 195

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 was not liable to be deducted under Section 195 of the Act. The disallowance made by A.O. under Section

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

195 of the Act. Thus no TDS has been made on difference of Rs 1,06,97,070/- which should have been disallowed by the AO. iii) The assessee has paid commission of Rs. 52.41,000/- to its directors as claimed in ITR. However no TDS was made on commission paid to directors. As such 30% of this amount

SOCIAL WORK & RESEARCH CENTRE,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 67/JPR/2018[2015-16 (27 Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2018

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (JCIT)
Section 195Section 200ASection 234E

TDS under section 195 of the IT Act on the said payments. The assessee also deposited the TDS so deducted

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

195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which call for deduction of tax at appropriate rate at the time of payment to a non- resident. In view of these provisions which find place in the statute, the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) are also attracted wherever TDS

M/S. SATYAM POLYPLAST,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

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

ITA 158/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (ACIT)
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40

TDS and consequently the provisions of Section 40(a)(i)of the Act cannot be invoked. The AO did not accept this contention of the assessee and referred to the Explanation II of Section 195

DEREWALA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6, JAIPUR

Appeal is partly allowed; while

ITA 170/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 195(1)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A

TDS in compliance of provisions of section 195(1) of the Act. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that

DEREWALA INDUSTRIES LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 60/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40Section 9a(1)(vii)

TDS is required to be deductable irrespective of facts that payment has been made to non-resident person would did not have place of business or business connection in India, in view of explanation 2 to section 195

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)

195(1) of the Act and therefore, TDS provisions are not applicable. Considering the language of section 195 of IT. Act and DTAA

GIRNAR SOFTWARE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 792/JPR/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Sept 2018AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goyal (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 17(2)Section 192Section 201(1)

TDS LTU (supra). However, we find that the issue in the said case was not for deduction of tax at source under section 192 of the Act. The provisions were created by the assessee in the said case on account of Girnar Software Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. various expenditures and the particulars are reproduced by the Tribunal in para

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

TDS as per provisions of the section 195 of the Act and income is chargeable to tax u/s 9 o the IT Act. 2. The appellant

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA GADEPAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SAVINA-UDAIPUR

ITA 694/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Adv. & Shri Mukesh SoniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 195Section 263Section 90

TDS was neither required to be deducted under Section 194A nor under Section 195, hence the order passed under Section

AJAY AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. CIT (IT), DELHI-1, CIT(IT) DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 637/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: MS Suhani Meharwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 129Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 263

195 in the name of assessee. Assessee himself offered the Long Term Capital Loss in his own name and claimed the TDS. 1.10 Ld. CIT observed that the booking rights were in joint name with wife of assessee, the capital loss should have been assessed 1/2 in both the assessee and his wife. 1.11 Your honour as per guidelines issued

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

TDS) on the Commission payments made to both these parties, therefore the sum of Rs. 4,81,562/- i.e.(Rs. 1,06,373/- Rs. 3,75,189/) is being disallowed In accordance with the provisions of section 40a(ia) and section 195

ITO (TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 38

195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Once the basic tax withholding liability under section 201(1) is quashed, the interest liability under section 201(1A), being consequential in nature, also stand quashed. The assessee gets the relief accordingly. CIT Vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. 287 ITR 354 (Raj.) Hon'ble High Court upheld the findings

ITO (TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

ITA 745/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 38

195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Once the basic tax withholding liability under section 201(1) is quashed, the interest liability under section 201(1A), being consequential in nature, also stand quashed. The assessee gets the relief accordingly. CIT Vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. 287 ITR 354 (Raj.) Hon'ble High Court upheld the findings