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.

85 results for “TDS”+ Section 199(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai443Delhi428Bangalore213Chennai117Karnataka108Kolkata85Chandigarh81Hyderabad58Jaipur48Ahmedabad47Pune46Raipur36Jodhpur29Lucknow29Indore18Visakhapatnam15Cuttack10Surat9Rajkot6Telangana5Amritsar4Cochin4Rajasthan3Panaji2SC2Agra1Nagpur1Patna1Calcutta1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)90Section 4048Disallowance45Section 14A38TDS38Addition to Income37Deduction31Section 25021Section 143(1)20Section 263

M/S EXCEL ENGINEERS,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T (OSD) CIR - 51,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

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

ITA 1588/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Subhas Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debnath Lahiri, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Sub-contractor payment of Rs. 21,45,387/- No evidence in support of identity of staff, mode of remittance and documents in support of disbursement was submitted. Entire payments were made to one Prasanna Vaishya. 2.2.1. The assessee filed his rejoinder to the remand report before the ld CITA separately for two expenditures . Labour

SANDERSONS & MORGANS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 54, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 85 · Page 1 of 5

20
Section 194C19
Section 145(3)13

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1520/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2004-05 (Appellant ) (Respondent) Sandersans & Morgans -Versus- A.C.I.T., Circle-54, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Abbfs 4291 B) For The Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan & Shri S.Basu, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri D.Banerjee, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2015 Order Per Shri M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Revenue Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Cita In Appeal No. 85/Cit(A)-Xxxvii/Acit-54/08-09. Dated 18.03.2009 For The Asst Year 2004-05 Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Assessing Officer Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan & Shri S.Basu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.Banerjee, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(14)Section 199(3)

TDS certificate for Rs. 1,01,090/- was duly furnished to the Learned AO by the assessee by way of an independent letter dt 28.5.2008 filed on 30.5.2008 which is enclosed in page 42 of the paper book filed by the Learned AR. He argued the provisions of section 199(3

SRI MANINDRA MOHAN MAZUMDAR,BURDWAN vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

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

ITA 2201/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2201/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sri Manindra Mohan Vs. J.C.I.T, Range-1, Asansol Mazumdar Sahana Apartment Mother Teressa 19, Radhangar Road, Burnpur- 713325, Road, Lower Chelidanga, Asansol – Dist- Burdwan. 713304. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aelpm 0074 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

199 of the Income Tax Act clearly provides that whenever the assessee offered income, the TDS credit has to be given to the assessee, and the said section does not speak that proportionate TDS credit should not be allowed to the assessee. As per sub -section (3

DEEPSHIKHA TRADING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1957/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

199(1) of the Act read with Section 198 of the Act, the credit for the TDS made in respect of the income of the amalgamating company which was shown in the hands of the amalgamated company ought to have been allowed to the amalgamated company. Since the amalgamating company is no longer in existence and all the assets

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)

3) of Section 199 of the Act alludes to the power invested in the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to frame rules as to how credit in respect of tax deducted or tax paid in terms of Chapter XVII is to be given. [See Rule 37BA). Significantly, the CBDT is empowered to frame rules that may be necessary

ITO, WD-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN, KOLKATA

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

ITA 593/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Ito(E), Wd-1(3), Kolkata Vs. The Institute Of Indian Foundrymen 6Th Floor, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata Iif Center, 335, Rajdanga Main – 700 071. Road, East Kolkata Township, P.O. Kolkata – 700 107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatt 6606 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Smt. Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

TDS by the receiver may not exactly tally with the Form 26AS because of timing of recognition. At this juncture it is relevant to quote the provisions of section 199 of the Act and Rule 37BA (3

SREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIR-11(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1157/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.1157/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aaacs1425L) Vs. Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata ……. Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Sm. Lata Goyal, Aca Appeared For Appellant Shri S. Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent . Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 29.04.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 05.09.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order U/S. 154 R,W,S, 143(3) Of The Act By Acit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Dated 12.07.2022. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), [Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Cit(A)] Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred In Not Granting The Interest U/S. 244A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act').

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)Section 250

3 of 8 I.T.A. No. 1157/Kol/2023 A Y: 2017-18, Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. of the act was made on 06.06.2022 and, therefore, the AO has given the refund for five months. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We note that the assessee originally filed the return on 29.11.2017 and in this return

DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1267/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Senior Counsel
Section 143(3)

199 Taxman 149/336 ITR 434111 taxmann.com 51 (Punj & Har.) (iii) Justice Sam P Bharucha v. Addl. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 192/25 taxmann.com 381 (Mum. - Trib.) 7.2 The Ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of the AO and contended that the AO has duly satisfied himself in pursuance of provisions of Sec. 14A(2) that

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RG-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 685/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Senior Counsel
Section 143(3)

199 Taxman 149/336 ITR 434111 taxmann.com 51 (Punj & Har.) (iii) Justice Sam P Bharucha v. Addl. CIT [2012] 53 SOT 192/25 taxmann.com 381 (Mum. - Trib.) 7.2 The Ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of the AO and contended that the AO has duly satisfied himself in pursuance of provisions of Sec. 14A(2) that

M/S BALMER LAWRIES & CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT) WD-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2079/KOL/2014[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. V/S. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 21, N.S.Road, (International Taxation), Kolkata-700 001 Ward-1(1), Aayakar [Pan No. Aabcb 0984 E] Bhawan (Poorva), 2Nd Floor, R. No.215, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata- 700 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri M.K.Poddar, Sr-Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.P.Bhatia, Jcit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-02-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 195Section 201(1)Section 5(2)(b)

3) or u/s. 197 of the Act, the entire sum paid to the overseas entities towards share in profit was liable to be TDS in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. (supra). 12. In the light of the above discussion it is held, that while the reimbursement

ACIT, CIRCLE-31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RAHEE JHAJHARIA E TO E JV, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off as above

ITA 1848/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am ] I.T.A No. 1848/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Circle-31, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Rahee Jhajharia E To E Jv [Pan: Aabar 5042 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 115/Kol/2017 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No. 1848/Kol/2017) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Rahee Jhajharia E To E Jv -Vs- Acit, Circle-31, Kolkata [Pan: Aabar 5042 H] (Respondent (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Pijush Mukherjee, JCITFor Respondent: Shri K.K.Khemka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 199Section 199(3)

TDS of Rs. 3,86,300/- (2% of 1,93,14,989/-) recovered Mobilization Advances by Moser Baer Construction Pvt. Ltd. be directed to be allowed in assessment year 2013-14 & balance of Rs. 9,09,867/- (12,96,167/- - 3,86,300/-) be directed to be allowed in assessment year 2014-15. 2 3 ITA No.1848/Kol/2017 C.O.115/Kol/2017 Rahee Jhajharia

GARDEN REACH SHIPBUILDERS & ENGINEERS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee on all the grounds, is dismissed

ITA 710/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.710/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2009-2010) Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Vs. Cit, Kolkata-1, Engineers Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, 43/46, Garden Reach Road, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700024 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacg 9371 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Revenue By : Shri Niraj Kumar, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/01/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.02.2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Dated 23.09.2009 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.85,39,43,105/-. Subsequently, The Assessee`S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Ao Has Assessed The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.90,01,69,060/-. Later On The Ld Cit Has Exercised The Jurisdiction U/S 263 Observing That There Is Difference In The Income Reported By The Assessee & The Income Accrued As Per Tds Certificates. The Ld Cit Observed That During The Year Under Consideration An Amount Of Rs. 7188898209 ( Rs.7181369792 + Rs.7528417) As Per Tds Certificates Was The Accrued Income From Sales Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engg. Ltd. During The Year On Which Tds Of Rs.87854016 ( Rs.87680873

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 199Section 263Section 263(1)

section 199 read with Rule 37BA (3) (i), the TDS claimed by the asessee should not be allowed, that is, only

ITO, WARD-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NIRA FIRM DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 358/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Waseem Ahmed & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Vs M/S. Nira Firm Developers Pvt.Ltd., Ito, Ward-3(3), 261, 276-277/6, G.T.Road (N), Kolkata. Howrah-711106. Pan-Aaccn4245Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Respondent By Sh. A.Kochar, Adv. Date Of Hearing 01.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2018

Section 143(3)Section 263

section 199 of the Act and cited several judicial pronouncements in his favor. I quite agree with the AO on this count. It is settled law that credit for TDS deducted and deposited with the Government can be given only in respect of income that is relatable to the year in which such claim has been made. The appellant

DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHELTER INFRA PROJECTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is allowed in part

ITA 1657/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri K.K.Khemka, Advocate & Shri P.C.Nayak, AR
Section 145Section 199(1)

3. The CIT{A) has erred both in law and facts in directing to allow credit for TDS amounting to Rs. 5,94,955/- on Mobilization Advance which is in contravention of the provisions of Section 199

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 1489/KOL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

TDS on the payment made by GRSE (i.e. the payer) but did not include the full amount of receipt from GRSE. The treatment given by the assessee in its accounts as well as in computation of its total income was contrary to the provisions of Section 198 & 199 of the Act. In view of this legal position, the difference amount

GIFFORD & PARTNERS LTD.(SINCE MERGED WITH GIFFORD LLP),KOLKATA vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1489/Kol/11 is partly allowed

ITA 2082/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C

TDS on the payment made by GRSE (i.e. the payer) but did not include the full amount of receipt from GRSE. The treatment given by the assessee in its accounts as well as in computation of its total income was contrary to the provisions of Section 198 & 199 of the Act. In view of this legal position, the difference amount

SUN BIOTECHNOLOGY LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(2), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is tr

ITA 2131/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble, Kz) Assessment Years: 2012-13 Sun Biotechnology Ltd.....………….………...........................................................……………….…......Appellant 21A, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aaecs 8587 R] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-7(2) Kolkata…………….......….……....…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 2Nd, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 2Nd, 2020 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Vp, Kz:-

Section 143(3)

3) called upon assessee to explain as to why rent termina upon assessee to explain as to why rent termination of lease was not offered tion of lease was not offered for taxation - it was explained on behalf of assessee that on behalf of assessee that tenancy was not valid after termination of t valid after termination of lease term

ITO, WD-31(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BATA INDIA LTD. EMPLOYEES STATUTORY PROVIDENT FUND, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 103/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kr.Das, JCIT.Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri S.Jhajharia, AR
Section 10Section 10(25)(ii)Section 139(1)Section 17Section 44A

section 199 of the Act the assessee was entitled to credit for tax deducted at source. The fact that the TDS certificate refers to assessment year 2005-06 is of no 6 7 M/s. Bata India Ltd. Employees Statutory Provident Fund. A.Yr.2006-07 consequence. The fact remains that the assessee has not claimed credit for TDS in any other

OSD, COKE (CONSORTIUM) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.O., CIR. 5(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 1442/KOL/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1442/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Anikesh Banerjee & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 199Section 199(3)Section 250Section 37B

section 199 and Rule 37BA. 5. FOR that the appellant craves leave to alter, amend, modify any of the grounds and/or take additional ground/s before or at the time of hearing of this appeal.” 3. The brief fact of the case is that the aassessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The TDS

DCIT, CIRCLE-48, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. 3 GUYS, HOWRAH

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1670/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)

Section 199 of the Act. 10. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who granted relief to assessee for the full amount of TDS by observing as under:- “TDS of Rs.20,18,902/- corresponding to Rs.l,78,19,084/- was deducted in Financial Year 2007-08 and was deposited on 31.05.2008. Rule 37BA(3