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.

1,428 results for “TDS”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,944Mumbai4,767Bangalore2,507Chennai1,994Kolkata1,428Pune1,036Patna744Ahmedabad687Hyderabad580Jaipur430Chandigarh352Cochin310Nagpur263Raipur244Indore232Lucknow160Visakhapatnam143Rajkot133Surat129Jodhpur108Karnataka101Cuttack100Ranchi82Panaji64Agra61Amritsar59Dehradun55Guwahati47Jabalpur41SC25Allahabad19Kerala17Calcutta16Varanasi12Telangana11Rajasthan6Himachal Pradesh6J&K5Punjab & Haryana5Orissa4Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Gauhati1

Key Topics

TDS67Addition to Income61Deduction58Section 4053Section 143(3)51Section 25050Section 14744Section 6841Section 201(1)33Disallowance

DCIT, CIR-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2640/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice-, Kz & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kolkata........................………..…..........Appellant Vs. M/S. The Jute Corporation Of India Ltd...................................................…………...................Respondent 15N, Hudco Building Nellie Sengupta Sarani Kolkata – 700 087 [Pan : Aabct 8820 B] Appearances By: Shri Biswajit Syam, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri T.P. Singh, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 16Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 8Th, 2021 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-, Kz :- This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 5, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 26/08/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194ISection 250Section 40

deduction of TDS. The appellant had not deducted TDS on payments amounting to Rs. deduction of TDS. The appellant had not deducted

Showing 1–20 of 1,428 · Page 1 of 72

...
33
Section 20130
Section 194J27

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-30(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. JATINDRA NATH GHOSH, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2647/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: : Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40

TDS was deductable or not. The assessee rightfully acknowledges that TDS was deductable however it was not deducted due to some

DCIT,CIRCLE-15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S L.G.W. LIMITED, NORTH 24 PARGANAS

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1786/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

TDS in India and failure to deduct TDS would attract provision of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 1.4 The Appellant

SUBHAG MERCANTILE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS WD-59(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 165/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2004-05

Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)

deducting TDS u/s 194I of the Act. On question for none deduction of TDS u/s 194-A of the Act. On question

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CREATIVE TECHNOTEX (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2035/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Vs M/S. Creative Technotex (P.) Ltd., Dcit, Circle-10(1), 73/29. Golf Club Road, Kolkata. Kolkata-700033. Pan-Aadcc9167C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Respondent By Sh. Subhash Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing 08.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 27.07.2018

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

TDS was deducted on commission paid to C& F agents and no TDS is deductable on the [Assessment Year: 2012-13] reimbursement

SRI SUTANU MAHANTY,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-53, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, for statistical purpose, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 302/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194ISection 196Section 40

TDS deducted on 68,68,932.00 (b) Short Deduction of TDS 55,26,122.00 (c) TDS not deducted 10,74,960.00 Less

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S CHAMPION COMMERCIAL CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1421/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Dcit, Circle-10(1), V/S. M/S Champion P-7, Chowringhee Commercial Co. Ltd., Square, 3Rd Floor, P-15, Cit Road, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-73 [Pan No.Aabcc 2373 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 04.04.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 10.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “I. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,50,938/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37(1) Overrule The Judicial Pronouncement Of Cit Vs. Calcutta Agency Limited (1951) (191) Itr (Sc) Ii. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.13,91,404/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The It Act, 1961. Iii. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.20,25,329/- On Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 44A

deduct the TDS. However, AO opined that assessee was liable to deduct the TDS u/s. 194J of the Act on loan

RAKESH KUMAR BHUTORIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 368/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 154Section 250

deducted at source (TDS) from that income and directed that TDS credit should be allowed to the assessee, even if the deducted

TURNER MORRISON LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR, KOL, KOLKATA

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

ITA 530/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)

deducting TDS paid rent to the assessee. Even though TDS was deducted from rent paid to the assessee, Cox & Kings

M/S. BHASKAR SHRACHI ALLOYS LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. JCIT(OSD), OSD TO CIT - III, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue is dismissed &

ITA 65/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194CSection 40

deducted TDS u/s. 194C on the aforesaid sum and since the assessee failed to deduct TDS on the sum of Rs.1

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BHASKAR SHRACHI ALLOYS LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue is dismissed &

ITA 330/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194CSection 40

deducted TDS u/s. 194C on the aforesaid sum and since the assessee failed to deduct TDS on the sum of Rs.1

M/S. A.K. INDUSTRIES ,HOWRAH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 46, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 665/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 194CSection 234BSection 40

TDS deduction. The AO observes that the appellant was liable to deduct TDS of Rs4,08,954 under section 194C

ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

deduction of TDS has to be complied with. In other words if no TDS is deducted from the payment of FTS made

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 751/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

deduction of TDS has to be complied with. In other words if no TDS is deducted from the payment of FTS made

ITO, WARD-40(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHADEOLAL NATHMAL, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1902/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini,Am] I.T. A No. 1902/Kol/2016 A.Y 2010-11 I.T.O. Ward 40(1), Kolkata V/S. M/S. Mahadeo Lal Nathmal Pan: Aaffmo 501M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate, ld.AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

deduction of TDS @ 2% Plus Surcharge Rs. 17674154.00 Transportation charges after deduction of TDS @ 0.33% Plus Surcharge Rs. 77700800.00 Transportation

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WD-TDS, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1032/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2021AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194ASection 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

TDS), the SLAO has not deducted any TDS as required u/s. 194LA of the Act. According to him, the SLAO

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. JCIT, R-59(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1256/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2021AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194ASection 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

TDS), the SLAO has not deducted any TDS as required u/s. 194LA of the Act. According to him, the SLAO

ACIT, CIR-5(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATIVALA & KARANI SECURITIES (INDIA) (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1812/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1812/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Acit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Batlivala & Karnani Securities (I)(P) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 4650 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 40

deducted TDS on the service fee paid by the assessee to its subsidiaries but not deducted TDS on reimbursement of expenditure

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1499/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

TDS was being deducted. Thus according to the AO the TDS provisions should have also been applied to the discount

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.), KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 233/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

TDS was being deducted. Thus according to the AO the TDS provisions should have also been applied to the discount