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.

52 results for “TDS”+ Section 205clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai302Delhi251Bangalore158Karnataka105Hyderabad73Chennai58Kolkata52Ahmedabad41Raipur37Jaipur27Pune20Chandigarh14Surat13Guwahati11Indore9Patna8Lucknow8Telangana5SC4Cochin4Varanasi4Amritsar3Agra2Nagpur2Rajkot2Panaji1Visakhapatnam1Jodhpur1Jabalpur1Calcutta1Allahabad1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)41Section 4035Deduction32TDS25Section 115J24Addition to Income22Section 143(1)19Disallowance18Depreciation13Section 68

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 Credit admissible under section 199 read with section 205. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

12
Section 20511
Section 36(1)(va)8

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 Credit admissible under section 199 read with section 205. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG)(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1009/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 36(1)(va)

TDS provisions of the Income-tax Act. Even, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 28 of the said decision has referred to the another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M. Deshpande [1972] 83 ITR 685/1 SCC 438, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Income

M/S.G.S. ATWAL & CO.(ENGG) (P)LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1008/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 36(1)(va)

TDS provisions of the Income-tax Act. Even, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 28 of the said decision has referred to the another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M. Deshpande [1972] 83 ITR 685/1 SCC 438, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Income

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 387/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

TDS provisions of the Income Tax Act. I.T.A. No.387/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Premier Irrigation Adritec (P) Ltd Even, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 28 of the said decision has referred to the another decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M Deshpande” reported in [1971] 1 SCC 438, wherein

AJAY KUMAR GOEL,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 52(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1533/KOL/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Nov 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiajay Kumar Goel Vs Dcit, Circle-52(1), Kolkata Sobha Magnolia, Flat No.C182, Bannerghatta Main Road, Bengaluru-560029 Pan No. :Aeapg 8383 C (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Abha Agarwal, Fca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Lakra, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, Sr. DR
Section 199Section 205

TDS deducted but not credited by the employer to the account of the Central Government. The Ld. AR also placed reliance on the Office Memorandum issued by the CBDT dated 11/03/2016 to the same effect which reads as follows:- 3 ITANo. 1533/Kol/2025 4. It was further submission that in view of the provisions of section 205

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)

205% 2. To individual 2,65,941 26,595 @ 10.0% 3 To individuals who submitted their 9,58,708 Nil 15G 4. to an individual (non-taxable) 4,511 Nil 19,86,233 1,82,797 The assessee also submitted that the parties (individual) who have field Form 15G were not subject to TDS under section

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)

section 205 of the Act puts a bar on direct demand against the assessee in such cases and the demand on account of tax credit mis-match in such situation cannot be enforced coercively. 5.1. The aforesaid CBDT office Memorandum is extracted below: 5 Turner Morrison Ltd. AY 2020-21 6. Ld. Counsel referred to judicial precedence of the Coordinate

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 431/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD., KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 673/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

205(1) of Company Act but to set off brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore against the profits of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 and profit of FY 2003-04 of Rs.50.99 crore.” Finally, in the decision for ground no 1 of the appeal in appellant’s own case for A.Y 2005-06, I had relied upon the method

D.C.I.T CIR - 4,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MADHU JAYANTI INTERNATIONAL, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1011/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2008-09

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 172Section 197Section 197ASection 40

205/- for non deduction of TDS in respect of payments made to the shipping agents as reflected in the asst order who are assessed to tax in India and the payments received by them are taxable in India.” 3. Facts in brief are that assessee in the present case is a Limited Company and engaged in manufacturing, processing, trading

M/S STANDARD FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.7(2), KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 178/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 194ASection 2Section 40

205 CTR (Mad) 493: (2006) 286 ITR 201 (Mad) and Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 303 ITR 411 (P&H) relied on. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the Revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under s. 36(1)(Hi) because as per this section, the deduction is provided

HARBHAJAN SINGH,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O WD - 1(4),KOLKATA, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1076/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 269S

205 CTR (Mad) 493 : (2006) 286 ITR 201 (Mad) and Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 303 ITR 411 (P&H) relied on. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the Revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under s. 36(1)(iii) because as per this section, the deduction is provided

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)

TDS in Assessment Year 2008-09. Not allowing the credit here in A.Y.2008-09 would go against the provision of section 205