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.

70 results for “TDS”+ Section 58clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,460Mumbai1,357Bangalore673Chennai461Hyderabad346Ahmedabad314Kolkata311Cochin210Indore191Jaipur182Raipur172Chandigarh161Karnataka148Pune142Visakhapatnam80Lucknow70Cuttack64Jabalpur64Surat48Dehradun36Ranchi32Rajkot31Agra20Nagpur20Allahabad20Amritsar16Guwahati14Telangana13Patna12Varanasi8SC7Jodhpur4Calcutta4Panaji4Uttarakhand2Punjab & Haryana2Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 1172Section 26360Section 143(3)52Section 206C49Addition to Income41Section 12A27TDS27Section 2(15)23Disallowance22Section 148

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD VIKRAMJOT BASTI,VIKRAMJOT vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER BASTI -NEW, INCOME TAX OFFICE BASTI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 486/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sahkari Ganna Vikas V. The Income Tax Officer Samiti Ltd. Basti Vikramjot, Basti (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aabas4611B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912. The Main Activity Of The Assessee Was Marketing Of Sugar Cane Grown By The Cane Growers, Who Were Members Of The Assessee-Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 21.03.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,73,170/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society Had Received Commission From Sugar Mills On Supply Of Sugar Cane Of Rs.70,16,032/-, Which Was Claimed As Exempt In Terms Of Section 80P(2)(A)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 57Section 80P

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

21
Deduction18
Natural Justice18
Section 80P(2)(a)

TDS made under section 194H as commission on receiving has been filed. 8. That the authority below erred on facts and in law in not allowing deduction u/s 80P on interest received on investment in form of FDR'S. 9. The addition disallowances are illegal, unjust highly excessive and against the material on record. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 1071/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 1073/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MORADABAD

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 273/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

ITA 1072/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.A. & Sh. Mradul Agarwal C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Mazahar Akram, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 154Section 2(15)Section 250

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTII vs. ITO, BASTI

ITA 295/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

TDS was made u/s.194H of the Act. Less: 1/3 for expenses by estimate Rs.11,85,859/- Rs.23,71,717/- Interest income as per ITR Rs.2,86,061/- Total Taxable income (rounded off) Rs.26,57,780/- ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 7 of 28 3.1 The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, assessing the total income at Rs.26

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTI vs. ITO, , BASTI

ITA 294/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

TDS was made u/s.194H of the Act. Less: 1/3 for expenses by estimate Rs.11,85,859/- Rs.23,71,717/- Interest income as per ITR Rs.2,86,061/- Total Taxable income (rounded off) Rs.26,57,780/- ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 7 of 28 3.1 The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, assessing the total income at Rs.26

FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER, DIOS, LUCKNOW.,LUCKNOW. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), LUCKNOW.

ITA 105/LKW/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102 To 106/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Finance & Accounts Officer, District Inspector Of Schools, Lucknow, 58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. Pan: Aaacf0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 198Section 199Section 250Section 272A(2)(k)

58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. PAN: AAACF0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Lucknow . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM; This

FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER, DIOS, LUCKNOW.,LUCKNOW. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), LUCKNOW.

ITA 106/LKW/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102 To 106/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Finance & Accounts Officer, District Inspector Of Schools, Lucknow, 58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. Pan: Aaacf0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 198Section 199Section 250Section 272A(2)(k)

58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. PAN: AAACF0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Lucknow . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM; This

FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER, DIOS, LUCKNOW.,LUCKNOW. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), LUCKNOW.

ITA 104/LKW/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102 To 106/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Finance & Accounts Officer, District Inspector Of Schools, Lucknow, 58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. Pan: Aaacf0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 198Section 199Section 250Section 272A(2)(k)

58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. PAN: AAACF0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Lucknow . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM; This

FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER, DIOS, LUCKNOW.,LUCKNOW. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), LUCKNOW., LUCKNOW.

ITA 103/LKW/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102 To 106/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Finance & Accounts Officer, District Inspector Of Schools, Lucknow, 58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. Pan: Aaacf0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 198Section 199Section 250Section 272A(2)(k)

58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. PAN: AAACF0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Lucknow . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM; This

FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER, DIOS, LUCKNOW.,LUCKNOW. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), LUCKNOW.

ITA 102/LKW/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.102 To 106/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Finance & Accounts Officer, District Inspector Of Schools, Lucknow, 58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. Pan: Aaacf0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 198Section 199Section 250Section 272A(2)(k)

58, Shiksha Bhavan, Jagat Narayan Rd. Lucknow. PAN: AAACF0233P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Lucknow . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : None for the Assessee Revenue by : Mr SK Sharma [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 25/06/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per G. D. Padmahshali, AM; This

M/S MODEL TANNERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 702/LKW/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Bar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 263Section 263(1)Section 80ISection 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

58,862/- from Unit -1 & Rs. 52,73,053/- from Unit -2) to the Overseas entities and debited in the Profit & Loss Account under head sales promotion without deduction of income tax at source u/s 195 of the I.T. Act. As per. provisions of section 195 of the Income Tax, 1961 read with section 9(1) (vii), it is mandatory

M/S MODEL TANNERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 701/LKW/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Bar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 263Section 263(1)Section 80ISection 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

58,862/- from Unit -1 & Rs. 52,73,053/- from Unit -2) to the Overseas entities and debited in the Profit & Loss Account under head sales promotion without deduction of income tax at source u/s 195 of the I.T. Act. As per. provisions of section 195 of the Income Tax, 1961 read with section 9(1) (vii), it is mandatory

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

ITA 348/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
Section 145(3)Section 54FSection 69

TDS provision under section 40A(3) of the Act, where profit is\nestimated.\n\n4. Because the Ld. CIT(A) Lucknow-III has erred on facts & law while\nsustaining the addition of Rs.9,65,000/- being disallowances of expenses\nunder section 40A(3) of the Act, where profit is estimated.\n\n5. Because the Ld. CIT(A) Lucknow

FUTURE PHARMA PVT.LTD,KANPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, KANPUR

ITA 263/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

For Appellant: Respondent by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 194HSection 263Section 40A(2)(b)

58 persons TDS has not been made on the ground that the amount paid individually was less than Rs 15,000. The company has neither provided details of such recipients nor has the FAO sought details to identify such Persons and verify the genuineness of such payments. Director remuneration In reply, the assessee company has submitted that it has paid

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

ITA 4/LKW/2004[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Oct 2025AY 1996-97
For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Shukla, Adv & ShubhamFor Respondent: Sh. Puneet Kumar, CIT DR
Section 10Section 17Section 2Section 2(5)Section 2(7)Section 8(2)

58) of the "Act" operate in an altogether different context and direction then the provisions of section 36(1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the analogy drawn by the learned CIT (A), for the purposes of upholding the applicability of Interest tax Act, 1974 in the case of the appellant, is misconceived and wholly unfounded 7.1 BECAUSE

PUSHPENDRA SINGH,RAEBARELI vs. DCIT CIRCLE,, FAIZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 14/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Pushpendra Singh V. Dcit Circle, 680, Amar Nagar, Raebareli Faizabad/National E- (U.P)-229001. Assessment Centre Delhi Pan:Axbps1905L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 194CSection 40

section 194C of the "Act" are not attracted and consequently, the expenses to the extent of Rs. 58,70,577/- could not have been subjected to disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the "Act" so as to make an addition of 30% thereof. 3.3 BECAUSE as per the material and information placed on record the sums aggregating

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JOINT ORGANISATION ,LUCKNOW vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 125/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

section 194LA of the Act. In view of the aforestated failure, the Ld. AO held the assessee as ‘assessee in default’ for non/short deduction of tax u/s 201(1) of the Act and consequently determined the liability for non/short deduction of TDS and interest chargeable thereon u/s 201(1A) of the Act as under; Short/Non Total Demand Interest

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JOINT ORGANISATION ,LUCKNOW vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 126/LKW/2023[2018-19 Qtr-1]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

section 194LA of the Act. In view of the aforestated failure, the Ld. AO held the assessee as ‘assessee in default’ for non/short deduction of tax u/s 201(1) of the Act and consequently determined the liability for non/short deduction of TDS and interest chargeable thereon u/s 201(1A) of the Act as under; Short/Non Total Demand Interest