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 249(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai320Delhi270Chennai131Bangalore108Karnataka89Raipur63Kolkata52Chandigarh51Cochin51Jaipur42Hyderabad30Pune30Ahmedabad25Lucknow21Surat20Indore19Visakhapatnam17Cuttack7Rajkot6Amritsar5Varanasi4Nagpur3Guwahati3Jodhpur2Panaji2Telangana2Kerala1Dehradun1Patna1

Key Topics

Addition to Income31Section 14A29TDS28Section 4024Deduction22Disallowance22Section 143(3)21Section 201(1)20Section 14418Condonation of Delay

ALLAHABAD BANK, NAKTALA BRANCH,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, TDS RG.57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1384/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1384/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Allahabad Bank, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Range-57, 10B, Middleton Row, 8Th Floor, Naktala Branch, 364/23A, Nsc Bose Road, Kolkata-700071 Kolkata-700040 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Cala 06329 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Tapas Dutta, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2017 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 2010-2011, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xvi, Kolkata, In Appeal No.138/Cit(A)-Xvi/Jcit,R-57/13-14/Kol, Dated 28.02.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Jt.Commissoner Of Income Tax-Tds (Ao),U/S.272A(2)(K)/274 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 08.12.2011. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Quarterly Tds Returns Late Therefore The Assessing Officer (Tds) Imposed Penalty On The Assessee U/S 272A(2)(K) Of The Act At Rs.50,336/- 3. The Captioned Appeal Is Time Barred By 32 Days. The Assessee Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Said Appeal. The Assessee Explained The Reasons For Delay Stating That Assessee Is A Schedule Bank

For Appellant: Shri Tapas Dutta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT
Section 1

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

15
Limitation/Time-bar13
Section 234E11
Section 206A
Section 249
Section 272
Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS) imposed penalty on the assessee U/s 272A(2)(k) of the Act at Rs.50,336/- 3. The captioned appeal is time barred by 32 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay in filing the said appeal. The assessee explained the reasons for delay stating that assessee is a schedule bank 2 Allahabad Bank and need to take

OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 295/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249(2)

section 249 provides for condonation of delay if the Ld. CIT(A) is satisfied with the sufficient cause explained by the assessee in respect of the delay. The description available with Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay on the basis of sufficient cause has to be dealt with reference to sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Various

OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 296/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249(2)

section 249 provides for condonation of delay if the Ld. CIT(A) is satisfied with the sufficient cause explained by the assessee in respect of the delay. The description available with Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay on the basis of sufficient cause has to be dealt with reference to sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Various

L & T FINANCE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW MERGED),KOLKATA vs. CIT(A),NFAC,ITD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 645/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 14ASection 249(3)Section 250

249(3) read with section 250. 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards CBDT Circular No. 20/2016 dated 26.05.2016. In this Circular, the CBDT has provided that mandatory filing of appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) electronically would be made applicable from 15.06.2016. In other words, prior to 15.06.2016 if any appeal has been filed

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. L & T FINANCE LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 14ASection 249(3)Section 250

249(3) read with section 250. 5. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards CBDT Circular No. 20/2016 dated 26.05.2016. In this Circular, the CBDT has provided that mandatory filing of appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) electronically would be made applicable from 15.06.2016. In other words, prior to 15.06.2016 if any appeal has been filed

GRAPHITE INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 618/KOL/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 618/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Graphite India Limited,.........................Appellant 31, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700016 [Pan: Aaacc0457C] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-11(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 200ASection 201Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

TDS Aaykar Bhawan, Vaishali, Ghaziabad (UP) ['Ld. AO'] for Assessment Year 2020-21on 28-10-2019. 2.0 In terms of the provisions of Section 249(2

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1469/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Ita No. 1469 & 1470/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12(1), Kolkata……………….………....…........Appellant Vs. M/S. The Peerless General Finance & Investment & Co. Ltd..................……………….…..Respondent 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan : Aabct 3043 L] Appearances By: Shri Supriyo Pal, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. & Subrata Dey, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. . Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 31St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 5Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 14ASection 250

TDS @ 1% was deducted on the payments and hence Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act hence Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not applicable. In case of payments to NG Gosai Printing Pvt. Ltd., as it was purchase is not applicable. In case of payments to NG Gosai Printing Pvt. Ltd., as it was purchase

D.C.I.T CIR - 3(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO LTD, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1470/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Ita No. 1469 & 1470/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12(1), Kolkata……………….………....…........Appellant Vs. M/S. The Peerless General Finance & Investment & Co. Ltd..................……………….…..Respondent 3, Esplanade East Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan : Aabct 3043 L] Appearances By: Shri Supriyo Pal, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. & Subrata Dey, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. . Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 31St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 5Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 14ASection 250

TDS @ 1% was deducted on the payments and hence Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act hence Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not applicable. In case of payments to NG Gosai Printing Pvt. Ltd., as it was purchase is not applicable. In case of payments to NG Gosai Printing Pvt. Ltd., as it was purchase

KANOI TEA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. P.C.I.T. - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 249Section 253Section 263Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon’ble High Courts as well as before

HITT HOLLAND INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGY B. V. vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 574/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 574/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hitt Holland Institute Of Traffic -Vs.- D.D.I.T. (Intl.T)-1, Technology B.V., Kolkata Kolkata. [Pan : Aabch 5694 R] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Agarwal, Ar For The Respondent : Shri.G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri.G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

249,869 TOTAL 963,749 43,050,675 4,305,067 Further, while passing the assessment order, the Ld. AO has observed that as per Sale of Goods Act, 1932 ('SOG Act'), sale is concluded at the time of its acceptance and that' Acceptance' does not mean mere receipt of goods but means checking the goods to ascertain whether they

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. MARKETING DIVISION (EASTERN REGION),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 58 (TDS)/KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1517/KOL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

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

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

2 and 3 by assessee are that L’d CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of Assessing Officer by holding the terminal charges paid to Bongigon Refinery & Petrocom Chemicals Ltd. (BRPL for short) for an amount of ₹ 10,51,87,592/- is liable to deduction u/s. 194C of the Act. 3.1 Facts in brief are that in the present

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 771/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 234ESection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 772/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 234ESection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before

COMANTRA E-SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.(CPC), TDS, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 770/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 234ESection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before

RAJESH PAGARIA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WD-48(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 464/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 464/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Rajesh Pagaria................................…………………………………………………………………Appellant 14, Watkins Lane, Gokul Apartment, Howrah – 711 101 [Pan: Aftpp 9012 M] I.T.O. Ward 48(2) Kolkata,...................……………………………………………...............Respondent 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata – 700 001 Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 22, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 11, 2018

Section 194ASection 40Section 68

2 raised by the assessee in this appeal challenging the addition of Rs. 4,00,000/- made by the A.O. and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of unexplained investment in shares is not pressed by the learned counsel for the assessee. The same is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. 6. The issue raised in ground

NEHA HRIDAYA,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, CPC, , BENGALURU

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

ITA 2462/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2462/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Neha Hridaya,…………………………….…..………Appellant Ic Viceroy Duke Gardens, Raghunathpur, Kolkata-700059, W.B. [Pan:Aofph7597L] -Vs.- Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru,…..……………………..Respondent Karnataka, Pin Code No. 560500

Section 143(1)Section 249(2)

section 249(2) of the Act. She further submitted that the she was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Due to that, the ld. CIT(Appeals) decided the appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the delay

SANJAY KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

ITA 453/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Ray, Advocate, Shri S. N. Patra & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

TDS or TCS statement but the amount is over claimed in the statement. Final F Credit will be reflected only when deductor reduces claimed amount in the statement or makes additional payment for excess amount claimed in the statement. All these transactions reported are not in the category of F (Final). But the AO did not consider this and passed

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EPCOS FERRITES LTD., (SINCE MERGED WITH M/S. EPCOS INDIA P. LTD.,), NADIA

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed, except other ground no

ITA 1597/KOL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2019AY 2002-03

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

For Appellant: Smt. Rituparna SinhaFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(7)Section 40A(9)Section 43BSection 80H

249 (Bangalore ­ Trib.) and the M/s.Epcos Ferrites Ltd (Since merged with M/s. Epcos India P.Ltd) decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the matter of DCIT vs. Rolls Royce Marine India (P.) Ltd reported in [2016] 70 taxmann.com 245 (Mumbai ­ Trib.). Based on the above precedents,we are of the considered view that under the TNMM, the focus should

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT-TDS, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1582/KOL/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2018-19

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

Section 201(1)

TDS), Circle-2, 10B, Middleton Row, 7th Floor, Kolkata-700 071 at page 11 below para 6 which is stated as under: 3 I.T.A. Nos. 1579 to 1582/Kol/2019 AYs: 2014-15 to 2016-17 & 2018-19 Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) “6. For attracting provisions of section of 194H of the Act it is essential that assessee Company

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT-TDS, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1580/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

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

Section 201(1)

TDS), Circle-2, 10B, Middleton Row, 7th Floor, Kolkata-700 071 at page 11 below para 6 which is stated as under: 3 I.T.A. Nos. 1579 to 1582/Kol/2019 AYs: 2014-15 to 2016-17 & 2018-19 Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) “6. For attracting provisions of section of 194H of the Act it is essential that assessee Company