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.

12 results for “TDS”+ Section 271Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi183Mumbai125Bangalore96Raipur39Jaipur30Ahmedabad21Kolkata19Chandigarh14Jodhpur12Indore12Karnataka12Lucknow10Nagpur10Visakhapatnam7Jabalpur5Hyderabad5Agra5Surat4Cochin4Ranchi3SC3Pune3Chennai2Rajkot2Dehradun1Orissa1Kerala1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)88Section 194C20TDS12Deduction11Section 133A8Section 271C7Section 2015Section 10(20)4Section 10(46)4Section 10

ITO, TDS-2, JODHPUR, JODHPUR vs. RAJENDRA KUMBHAT, HUF, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenuebearing ITA No

ITA 34/JODH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 246Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271CSection 274Section 275(1)(c)

section 271C initiated separately for non- deduction of TDS'. Whereas, the penalty order is dated 28.8.2018. Appellant has contended that

4
Penalty2

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (NORTH),UDAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 85/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (NORTH),UDAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 86/JODH/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH),UDAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 76/JODH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORET,BANSWARA vs. ITO, TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/JODH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH),UDAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 75/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO (TDS), UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 84/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,DUNGARPUR vs. ITO (TDS),, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 103/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,BANSWARA vs. ITO, TDS,, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

271C to office of additional CIT, TDS Rage, Udaipur with separate covering letter.” 6. Being aggrieved by the AO the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and he confirmed the orders of AO with the following observations:- “Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

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

ITA 114/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the said demand by stating that the VFPMCs are not contractors under Section 194C, as they are formed under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and function as self-help groups for forest conservation and development. The payments made to VFPMCs are not contract payments but are reimbursements for work done under the joint forest management policy of the State Government.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

section 194C thus do not apply. We get support of this view from the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in ITA No.6844/Del./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) in the case of M/s. Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Range 77 New Delhi where in the coordinate bench has also considered these aspect of the matter. The relevant part

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOUTH, UDAIPUR

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

ITA 113/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 80P

section 194C thus do not apply. We get support of this view from the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in ITA No.6844/Del./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) in the case of M/s. Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Range 77 New Delhi where in the coordinate bench has also considered these aspect of the matter. The relevant part

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ,JODHPUR vs. ITO, (TDS)(II),, JODHPUR

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

ITA 250/JODH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradpunjab National Bank, Vs Ito, R.R. Singhvi, Advocate, Tds (Ii), “Rajhans” 1St A Road, Jodhpur (Rajasthan) Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Jdhpo2161F Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2023 Date Of 21/03/2023 Pronouncement

Section 10Section 11Section 194ASection 197ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

section 12A and 10(23C)(vi). In the instant case, had the TDS been deducted, still the same would have been claimed as refund by the deductee. Thus a lenient view can be taken in favor of the appellant for non deduction of TDS u/s 194A keeping in view the ratio laid by the Hon'ble Apex court