Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

362 results for “TDS”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,109 Mumbai1,857 Bangalore682 Pune611 Chennai535 Ahmedabad386 Kolkata362 Hyderabad324 Jaipur318 Indore233 Raipur214 Chandigarh190 Karnataka151 Cochin137 Nagpur117 Surat109 Visakhapatnam102 Cuttack94 Jabalpur94 Rajkot84 Lucknow61 Dehradun43 Jodhpur34 Guwahati33 Agra31 Amritsar30 Allahabad29 Ranchi24 Panaji23 Patna16 Telangana15 SC13 Varanasi11 Calcutta3 Orissa2 Kerala2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)70 TDS62 Section 234E53 Addition to Income51 Deduction49 Disallowance42 Section 4040 Penalty37 Section 25031 Section 147

M/S PIYANSHU CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,TOPSIA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-12(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2350/KOL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 3Section 37

TDS Rs. 11,723/- Penalty on PF Rs. 498/- Penalty on Entry Tax Rs. 567/- Total Rs.11,70,671/- 5. As noted

D.CI.T.(TDS), CIRCLE-58, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S J.J.EXPORTERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 2569/KOL/2013[2007-2008]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 362 · Page 1 of 19

...

29

Section 271(1)(c)22

ITAT Kolkata

15 Jun 2016

AY 2007-2008

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

For Appellant: Shri S.Jhajharia, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Sudipta Guha, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271CSection 273BSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

TDS) in his penalty order has taken the only ground for imposition of penalty that the matter “was still alive

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 419/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 416/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 422/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 421/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 417/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 415/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 420/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

BHASKAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS 1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, petition fails and is dismissed

ITA 418/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

PASSPORT JEANS PVT LTD ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 575/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 200ASection 234E

penalty for default in filing TDS statement and also for furnishing of incorrect information in such TDS statement. The proviso

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-3(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 67/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

TDS & TCS and such interest being of compensatory in nature and not penal in nature since there is separate provision for imposing penalty

M/S SALARPURIA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CC-3(2), KOLKATA

ITA 2492/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

TDS & TCS and such interest being of compensatory in nature and not penal in nature since there is separate provision for imposing penalty

JANARDAN NIRMAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT,(TDS), RANGE-57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1822/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1822/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Janardan Nirman Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan [Pan: Aaccj 0540 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

penalty order passed by the JCIT(TDS), Range-57, Kolkata[ in short the ld AO] under section 272A(2)(k)/274

DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HEIGHT INSURANCE SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1939/KOL/2010[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Dr. Adhir Kumar Bar, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194DSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

penalty levied by Addl.CIT(TDS) u/s. 271C of the Act for failure/short deduction of TDS u/s194-D of the Act as against

RAIGANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,RAIGANJ, UTTAR DINAJPUR vs. D,C,I.T., CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 975/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

penalty of ₹1,18,472/- for non-deduction of TDS under section 194-I of the Act though TDS was actually

ADVANCEMULTISYSTEM BRODDBAND COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.,HOOGHLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS),HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

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

ITA 2191/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 194ASection 201Section 221

TDS amount and interest thereon for such default before initiation of penalty proceedings. When the assessee had deposited the TDS

MMJ EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-58(TDS), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 666/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kr. Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

TDS), Range-58, Kolkata u/s. 272A(2)(k)/274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2010-11 vide his order dated 20.09.2011. 2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in confirming the penalty

EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 314/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR

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

penalty and TDS write off. He also agreed with the contention of the assessee that the TDS written off should

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EIH LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 348/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR

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

penalty and TDS write off. He also agreed with the contention of the assessee that the TDS written off should