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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai72Chennai48Bangalore42Delhi31Karnataka21Indore10Pune9Kolkata7Visakhapatnam6Lucknow6Hyderabad5Jaipur5Panaji5Amritsar4Allahabad4Rajkot3Patna3Nagpur2Chandigarh2Ahmedabad2Telangana1Dehradun1Raipur1SC1Surat1Jabalpur1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 271A13Section 271C7Section 271B5Section 194C5Penalty5TDS5Section 271F4Section 1484Section 143(3)4Section 270A

ANUNOY MUKHERJEE,DURGAPUR vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(4), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 555/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 555/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anunoy Mukherjee Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 Vs (4), Durgapur Near Hdfc Bank Bamunara Kanksa Durgapur - 713212 [Pan : Cydpm3295A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kr. Agrawal, C.A. & Shri Rohitash Gupta, C.A. Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/02/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 21/07/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of One (1) Day In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Only Issue That Arises For Our Consideration Is Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Confirming The Penalty U/S 271B Of The Act At Rs.1,36,214/-, Levied For Not Getting The Books Of Account Audited U/S 44Ab Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kr. Agrawal, C.A. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 194CSection 250
4
Addition to Income3
Permanent Establishment2
Section 271
Section 271A
Section 271B
Section 271C
Section 271D
Section 271E
Section 271F
Section 271G

TDS of Rs.30,896/-. The case selected for limited scrutiny through CASS for the reason of cash deposit during the year. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. Assessing Officer on going through the details of bank account held by the assessee with HDFC Bank observed that cash of Rs.1,48,19,170/- was deposited

M/S MUKHERJEE ENTERPRISE,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 33(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 401/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2004-05 M/S Mukherjee Enterprise, V/S. Income Tax Officer, 63/4, Harish Chatterjee Ward-33(3), 10B, Street, Kolkta-700 025 Middleton Row, [Pan No.Aaffm 1374 C] Kolkata - 700071 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 274

TDS and maintenance of Books of Account as accompanying the Return (excepting enhancing rate of Net Profit on estimate; the Learned CIT(A) was not justified in law in upholding the order ITA No.401/Kol/2013 A.Y. 2004-05 M/s Mukherjee Enterprise v. ITO, Wd.33-(3) Kol. Page 3 U/s 271A rejecting app’s explanation for failure to produce the books

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

TDS is to be deducted u/s. 194C of the Act i.e. payments to contractors. Ld. Counsel for the assessee in view of the above opinion referred to the case law of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of ITO Vs. Sachinam Trust (2010) 320 ITR 445 (Guj) wherein the Tax Audit Manual published by Bombay Chartered Accountants Society

OUTOTEC(FINLAND) OY (NOW MERGED WITH "METSO MINERALS OY" AND THE MERGED ENTITY HAS BEEN RENAMED TO METSO OUTOTEC FINLAND OY),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result,both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 350/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. HukughaSema, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 271A

271B of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is incorporated in Finland and is a tax resident of the same. Assessee is a worldwide leader in providing innovative and environmentally sound solutions for a wide range of customers in metals processing industries. During the year under consideration, with regard to Indian projects, assessee has earned

OUTOTEC (FINLAND) OY (NOW MERGED WITH "METSO MINERALS OY" AND THE MERGED ENTITY HAS BEEN RENAMED TO METSO OUTOTEC FINLAND OY),HARYANA vs. ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result,both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 351/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. HukughaSema, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 271A

271B of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is incorporated in Finland and is a tax resident of the same. Assessee is a worldwide leader in providing innovative and environmentally sound solutions for a wide range of customers in metals processing industries. During the year under consideration, with regard to Indian projects, assessee has earned

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. PRATIK INTERNATIONAL INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2539/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139Section 148Section 194(1)(b)Section 194C

TDS documents are not according to the accounting principles and is against the provisions of the law. Instead of calling all the vouchers and documents, the Ld. AO should have test checked the same before rejecting the books of the appellant. In his order, the Ld. AO even failed to invoke section 145 of the Act, 1961 to reject

PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PRATIK INTERNATIONAL INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2538/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 139Section 148Section 194(1)(b)Section 194C

TDS documents are not according to the accounting principles and is against the provisions of the law. Instead of calling all the vouchers and documents, the Ld. AO should have test checked the same before rejecting the books of the appellant. In his order, the Ld. AO even failed to invoke section 145 of the Act, 1961 to reject