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.

95 results for “TDS”+ Section 288clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi496Mumbai381Chennai151Bangalore108Kolkata95Karnataka90Jaipur88Hyderabad77Ahmedabad24Lucknow22Chandigarh22Pune21Cuttack20Indore17Rajkot14Jodhpur11Surat8Cochin6Guwahati6Amritsar5Dehradun4Telangana4Kerala4Visakhapatnam3Nagpur3Ranchi3SC3Varanasi2Calcutta2Panaji1Raipur1Rajasthan1Jabalpur1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)98Section 143(3)62Deduction59TDS50Addition to Income43Section 80I40Section 20139Disallowance38Section 4036Section 195

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE EAST LTD.), KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 232/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

24
Section 26321
Section 153A20
ITA 1540/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1539/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE EAST LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1537/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1502/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1499/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE EAST LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1538/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, TDS, CIR-59 (TDS) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 137/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, TDS, CIR-59 (TDS) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 136/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

ACIT, CIR-3(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.), KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 233/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1500/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

VODAFONE SOUTH LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, (TDS) CIR-59 (TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1501/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

Section 194H and the income tax or the TDS is required to be deducted is not correct and accordingly disallowance on that basis is not correct in our considered opinion, from which amount of tax is to be deducted is a doubtful proposition inasmuch a the Management Information Scheme which has been sought to be relied upon for alleging that

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)

section 201 only where the deductee/payee has also failed to pay such tax directly. This issue has been considered by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Jagran Prakashan Ltd. V. DCIT (TDS) (2012) 345 ITR 288

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

ITA 1615/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

TDS certificate is essential. 6. Whether this contention is correct, is the issue to be decided. 7. In order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the Act:-- (i) Section 40(a)(i) of the Act :-- "Section 40 - Amounts not deductible: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 38, the following amounts

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

ITA 1616/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

TDS certificate is essential. 6. Whether this contention is correct, is the issue to be decided. 7. In order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the Act:-- (i) Section 40(a)(i) of the Act :-- "Section 40 - Amounts not deductible: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 38, the following amounts

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

288 ITR 408, SC), wherein it was held "That, in relation to offshore services, section 9(I)(vii)(c) required two conditions to be met: to be taxable in India the services which were the source of the income sought to be taxed had to be rendered in India as well as utilised in India. In this case, both these

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

288 ITR 408, SC), wherein it was held "That, in relation to offshore services, section 9(I)(vii)(c) required two conditions to be met: to be taxable in India the services which were the source of the income sought to be taxed had to be rendered in India as well as utilised in India. In this case, both these

M/S VODAFONE EAST LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. A.D.I.T RANGE - 7,KOL., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1864/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

TDS on amount paid to deductee and, in turn, deductee also hasn't offered to tax income embedded in such amount. The penalty for tax withholding lapse per se is separately provided under section 271C. and, therefore, section 40(a)(ia) isn't attracted to the same. Hence, an assessee could not be penalized under section 40(a)(ia) when

ACIT, CIRCLE - 52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 366/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Srivastava, CITFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

TDS was not required to be deducted. We also note that the payments in question were made prior to circular No. 7/2009. On this aspect, there is no dispute. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the tribunal deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section

DCIT,CIRCLE-52, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SRI SUBHOTOSH MAJUMDER . S. JAMUMBDER &CO,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1629/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S. Srivastava, CITFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

TDS was not required to be deducted. We also note that the payments in question were made prior to circular No. 7/2009. On this aspect, there is no dispute. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the tribunal deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section