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.

56 results for “TDS”+ Section 201clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,554Delhi1,537Bangalore1,096Chennai646Kolkata462Indore368Ahmedabad285Pune285Karnataka257Jaipur225Cochin203Raipur177Hyderabad175Nagpur155Chandigarh127Cuttack88Surat63Visakhapatnam63Lucknow59Rajkot57Jodhpur56Jabalpur50Ranchi40Panaji36Kerala28Telangana27Agra25Amritsar25Dehradun24Allahabad18Patna17SC13Guwahati10Varanasi8Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan3Orissa3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)141Section 234E67Section 143(3)49TDS47Section 194I44Section 206C37Section 194C36Deduction32Section 20128Section 200A

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 83/JODH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. ITA No. 83/Jodh/2023 (A.Y. 2016-17): 3. Briefly, the facts are, as stated by the Assessing Officer, the assessee is engaged in hotel business and provides facility for rooms, restaurant and bar. To verify the TDS

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

28
Addition to Income19
Survey u/s 133A8

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 85/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. ITA No. 83/Jodh/2023 (A.Y. 2016-17): 3. Briefly, the facts are, as stated by the Assessing Officer, the assessee is engaged in hotel business and provides facility for rooms, restaurant and bar. To verify the TDS

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 84/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. ITA No. 83/Jodh/2023 (A.Y. 2016-17): 3. Briefly, the facts are, as stated by the Assessing Officer, the assessee is engaged in hotel business and provides facility for rooms, restaurant and bar. To verify the TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT-TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 106/JODH/2019[2016-17 (26Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 112/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q - 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 110/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 111/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26Q - 3)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 109/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q- 1)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 107/JODH/2019[2016-17 (26 Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

TDS statement. 3. Levy of the late fee is illegal, wrong and not in accordance with the law. 4. That as per the provision of the section 201

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL STATION HEADQUARTER BSF,BIKANER vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE, JODHPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 302/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

TDS against all the appellants u/s. 200A of the Act are so far as they are for the period prior to 01.06.2015 can be said as without any authority under the law. We note that the issue has been dealt in detail in the order of the Tribunal in Maharastra Cricket Association & Ors. Vs. DCIT (2016) 182 TTJ (Pune

SUSHIL KUMAR MARLECHA,PALI vs. DEPUTY/ASSTT, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1,, GHAZIABAD / JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 123/JODH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 205CSection 206CSection 234E

TDS is deducted, normally it is remitted promptly to the Income Tax department. Even if there is delay in depositing the amount, interest is charged as provided under Section 201

ABDUL AJEEJ,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 174/JODH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur05 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 194Section 194ISection 194LSection 201(1)

TDS, Udaipur passed under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') all dated

ABDUL HAKIM,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 173/JODH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur05 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 194Section 194ISection 194LSection 201(1)

TDS, Udaipur passed under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') all dated

ABDUL RASHID,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 172/JODH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur05 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 194Section 194ISection 194LSection 201(1)

TDS, Udaipur passed under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') all dated

ABDUL KADIR,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

ITA 175/JODH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur05 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 194Section 194ISection 194LSection 201(1)

TDS, Udaipur passed under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') all dated

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST FOREST BHILWARA,BHILWARA vs. CIT APPEAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 99/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for “assessee not in default”. 4. Brief facts of the case involve, that the appellant was covered by a survey u/s 133A(2A) of I.T. Act on 17.10.2019 so as to verify whether the appellant as a deductor is deducting tax at source (TDS

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST FOREST BHILWARA,BHILWARA vs. CIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 98/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Vohra, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for “assessee not in default”. 4. Brief facts of the case involve, that the appellant was covered by a survey u/s 133A(2A) of I.T. Act on 17.10.2019 so as to verify whether the appellant as a deductor is deducting tax at source (TDS

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS , UDAIPU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 126/JODH/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2012-13
Section 206CSection 5

Section 201(3) of the Act in respect of ‘tax deduction at source’. The reference is made to the decision of the Honble Bench in Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO 57 ITD 536 (Mum); CIT vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Del ); NHK Japan Broadcast ing Corporation 305 ITR 137 (Del ); State Bank of India

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 125/JODH/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2011-12
Section 206CSection 5

Section 201(3) of the Act in respect of ‘tax deduction at source’. The reference is made to the decision of the Honble Bench in Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO 57 ITD 536 (Mum); CIT vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Del ); NHK Japan Broadcast ing Corporation 305 ITR 137 (Del ); State Bank of India

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 127/JODH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2013-14
Section 206CSection 5

Section 201(3) of the Act in respect of ‘tax deduction at source’. The reference is made to the decision of the Honble Bench in Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO 57 ITD 536 (Mum); CIT vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Del ); NHK Japan Broadcast ing Corporation 305 ITR 137 (Del ); State Bank of India