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.

81 results for “TDS”+ Section 204clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai322Delhi270Bangalore168Karnataka107Kolkata81Pune77Chandigarh61Chennai52Jaipur34Ranchi31Visakhapatnam31Ahmedabad28Indore25Hyderabad21Raipur16Surat12Lucknow11Nagpur10Panaji10Rajkot8Cochin6Patna6Jabalpur6Guwahati5Agra3J&K2SC2Telangana1Varanasi1Amritsar1Dehradun1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)72Deduction44Section 4043Section 80I39TDS39Disallowance34Section 14A31Addition to Income31Section 26324Section 2(22)(e)

M/S MCC PTA INDIA CORPN. PVT. LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-59, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 151/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012
Section 11Section 194Section 194ISection 201(1)

TDS. The disallowance made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the AO is within the provisions of law. Hence, we restore the disallowance and the order of CIT(A) is reversed. This issue of revenue’s appeal is allowed.” Accordingly Ld Senior DR stated that the issue is covered in favour of Revenue

MARTIN BURN LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 4(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1914/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 81 · Page 1 of 5

22
Section 25017
Section 2(22)14
ITAT Kolkata
20 Jul 2016
AY 2007-08

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

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 40

TDS. The disallowance made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the AO is within the provisions of law. Hence, we restore the disallowance and the order of CIT(A) is reversed. This issue of revenue’s appeal is allowed.” Accordingly Ld Senior DR stated that the issue is covered in favour of Revenue

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-57(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 643/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194JSection 254

section 204(iii), the person responsible for deducting TDS from fees for professional services in terms of section 194J is the payer

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1140/KOL/2016[10-Sep]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2016

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194JSection 254

section 204(iii), the person responsible for deducting TDS from fees for professional services in terms of section 194J is the payer

HERIGAGE HEALTH TPA(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT(TDS), CIRCLE -57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1156/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194JSection 254

section 204(iii), the person responsible for deducting TDS from fees for professional services in terms of section 194J is the payer

A.C.I.T(TDS) CIR - 57,KOL, KOLKATA vs. M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA (P) LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 1761/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194JSection 254

section 204(iii), the person responsible for deducting TDS from fees for professional services in terms of section 194J is the payer

M/S HERITAGE HEALTH TPA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1139/KOL/2016[09-Aug]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2016

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194JSection 254

section 204(iii), the person responsible for deducting TDS from fees for professional services in terms of section 194J is the payer

M/S. FUTURE DISTRIBUTORS,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 9, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 277/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2010-2011

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

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263Section 40

204 and the I.T.A. No. 277/KOL./2016 Assessment year: 2010-2011 Page 24 of 38 question of liability to deduct tax under section 194G or consequential disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) would not arise. 16. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that the amount in question was not in the nature of any commission or remuneration paid

M/S GAURISHANKAR BIHANI,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.-CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on ground No

ITA 2691/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)

TDS, therefore, no tax was deducted on such payment. The A.O. invoked section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act and made addition and the said addition confirmed by the ld CIT(A), without considering the factual position of the case. The assessee mentioned circular 735 dated 30.0l.1996 of CBDT and various case laws but ld CIT(A) ignored

ANIRUDH BHUWALKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 514/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A Nos.513&514/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Anirudh Bhuwalka.......................................................................……Appellant A.C. Bbhuteria & Co., 2 India Exchange Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-1 [Pan: Aegpb7445E] Vs. Dcit, Cpc…………….….….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 14, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 09, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 22.09.2021 & 06.10.2021 Respectively Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.514/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2019-20 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 514/Kol/2021 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(1)Section 192Section 205Section 250

TDS even then the assessee being the principal officer of the company is liable to be treated as assessee in default under the provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1a) read with section 204

ANIRUDH BHUWALKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 513/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A Nos.513&514/Kol/2021 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Anirudh Bhuwalka.......................................................................……Appellant A.C. Bbhuteria & Co., 2 India Exchange Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-1 [Pan: Aegpb7445E] Vs. Dcit, Cpc…………….….….....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 14, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 09, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 22.09.2021 & 06.10.2021 Respectively Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.514/Kol/2021 For Assessment Year 2019-20 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. Ita 514/Kol/2021 – The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(1)Section 192Section 205Section 250

TDS even then the assessee being the principal officer of the company is liable to be treated as assessee in default under the provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1a) read with section 204

ITO, WARD - 13(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD., , HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2441/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 1(4)/ KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2402/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

POREL DASS WATER & EFFLUENT CONTROL PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-13(3), KOLKATA, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 1354/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1354/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Addl.CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

TDS shall be deducted on the whole of the invoice value. From the above clarification provided in the Memorandum leaves no element of doubt and the definition of ‘work’ as occurring in Explanation below to section 194Cof the Act, does not apply to the assessee under consideration so far his claim of deduction under section 80IA

I.T.O WD - 28(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAN VIJAY SINGH, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2038/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 May 2016AY 2004-05

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

Section 194ISection 271C

TDS in terms of Sec. 271C of the Act. From the facts of the case, we find that income of KPT is exempted from tax and in this connection, we are putting our reliance in the order of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Gourishankar Bihani v. DCIT in ITA No.1127/Kol/2011 for AY 2007-08 dated 18.12.2014, wherein this

AT & S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KARNATAKA vs. DCIT-RANGE-11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2305/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 4(1)Section 4(2)Section 40Section 90(2)

section 90(2) of the Act provides that in case of double taxation avoidance agreement with the Govt. of another country, the provision of this act will apply only to the extent if it is beneficial to the assessee. The assessee also demonstrated that the payment is not towards royalty. Therefore it is out of the purview of the TDS

D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S AT & S INDIA PVT LTD, KARNATAKA

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

ITA 1160/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 4(1)Section 4(2)Section 40Section 90(2)

section 90(2) of the Act provides that in case of double taxation avoidance agreement with the Govt. of another country, the provision of this act will apply only to the extent if it is beneficial to the assessee. The assessee also demonstrated that the payment is not towards royalty. Therefore it is out of the purview of the TDS

DCIT, CIR-12(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SELVEL MEDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ( Ground No

ITA 2205/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Aug 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2205/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T, Cirle-12(2), Vs. M/S Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata 10/1B, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata – 700 027. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 7951 G (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) Assessee By :Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Revenue/Department By :Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.237/Xii/Cir-12/14-15 Dated 17.09.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 20.03.2014. 2. Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,42,76,824/- Made By The A.O. On Depreciation On Hoarding Structures.” 2. “That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,66,53,847/- Made By The A.O. On Account Of Deduction U/S. 80-Ia.”

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80

204,875/- is allowed on M/s Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2011-12 hoardings used for more than 180 days use and Rs. 314,565/- is allowed on hoardings for less than 180 days use. On the basis of above discussion Rs.14,276,824/-(12,494,290/- + 1,782,534/-) is disallowed and added back to total income

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDO NABIN PROJECTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue (Ground No

ITA 2036/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2036/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Circle-10(1), Vs. M/S. Indo Nabin Projects Ltd. Kolkata 1582, Rajdanga Main Road, 7Th Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, P-7, Floor, Kolkata – 700 107. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci 6515 M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit(Dr) Respondent By:Shris. R. Bhattacharya, Ca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/03/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Kolkata, In Appeal No.1357/Cit(A)-4/Ward- 10(1)/Kol/15-16, Dated 03.08.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 02.01.2016. 2.Ground No.1 Raised By The Revenue Relates To Disallowance Of Rs.32,383/- Which Is, As Per Revenue, Penal In Nature Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ii). 3.1The Brief Facts Apropos This Issue Are That Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2013-14 On 24.09.2012 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.6,70,51,640/-. The Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act & The Assessing Officer Completed Assessment U/S 143(3) By Making Various Disallowances. During The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: ShriS. R. Bhattacharya, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

TDS is not levied on the interest on income tax but it is levied on account of tax deducted at source from the payments. Therefore, the said section is not applicable on interest on income tax. Apart from this, the assessing officer has not brought anything on record to establish that the assessee has M/s Indo Nabin Projects Ltd. Assessment

DCIT, CIR-2, JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI vs. M/S UTTAR BANGA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, COOCHBIHAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 708/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Nov 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

204 CTR 182 (SC) 5. In view of the above facts, provision of law and ratio of judgements, substantial questions of law arises. 6. The appellant may please be allowed to add or alter the grounds of appeal, if any.” ITA No.707-708/Kol/2015 Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 DCIT, Cir-2, JAL Vs. M/s Uttar Banga Kshetriya Gramin Bank Page