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.

125 results for “TDS”+ Section 272A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune325Delhi221Mumbai125Chennai88Bangalore71Visakhapatnam56Karnataka26Nagpur25Kolkata23Ahmedabad20Lucknow18Panaji15Indore12Cochin12Surat11Raipur10Hyderabad9Agra8Varanasi6Chandigarh6Jaipur4Rajkot4Patna3Jodhpur2Cuttack2Allahabad1Jabalpur1Guwahati1SC1Amritsar1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 234E115Section 272A(2)(k)108Penalty77Section 271(1)(b)70TDS60Section 200(3)55Section 200A47Section 142(1)37Section 20027Section 271B

THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS) 2, MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 1999/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1999/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ The Board Of Control For Acit (Tds) 2 Cricket In India, R.No. 701, 7 Th Floor, Wankhede Stadium, Smt. K.G. Mittal V. “D” Road, Churchgate, Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai 400020 Bldg., Charni Road, Mumbai-400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaatb0186A (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Nitesh Joshi Shri. Anil Sathe Revenue By : Shri. D.G Pansari , Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1999/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Date 10.01.2017 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-60, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2011-12, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Penalty Order Dated 16.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 272A(2)(K) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2011-12. I.T.A. No.1999/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. D.G Pansari , DR
Section 200(3)Section 206Section 272Section 272A(2)

Showing 1–20 of 125 · Page 1 of 7

25
Search & Seizure20
Addition to Income16
Section 272A(2)(k)
Section 273B

section 272A(2) of the Act, since penalty has been levied for default in furnishing e-TDS returns under section

BAKHTAWAR CONSTRUCTION CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6943/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6943/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Bakhtawar Construction Co. Addl. Cit (Tds) Rg 1 P. Ltd, Meher House, 10T H Floor, K.G. Mittal 1St Floor, Casasji Patel Street Ayurvedic Hosptial Bldg, V. Fort, Bombay 400001 Charni Road(W) Mumbai 400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacb4942P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Amogh M. GhaisasFor Respondent: Shri. Suman Kumar (DR)
Section 194CSection 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2) of the Act, since penalty has been levied for default in furnishing e-TDS returns under section

LATE SHRI JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN , KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1477/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1479/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE JAYESH THAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1478/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE SHRI JAYEESH THAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD KALYAN , KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1476/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

NATIONAL LAMINATE CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. CPC (TDS), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4902/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik – Ld. DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LAWMEN CONCEPTS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CPC-TDS , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 5140/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Michael Jerald-Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

TDS, the Dy. CIT had passed an order under section 154 of the Act (see pages 3-5 of Factual paper book-1). 4 25.08.2003 The Dy. CIT issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Act, selecting the Assessee’s ROI for scrutiny (see page 6 of Factual paper book-1). 5 17.10.2003 The Addl. CIT (Transfer Pricing

ASPANDIAR R. IRANI & GUSTAD R. IRANI,THANE vs. CIT (A)-1, THANE

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

ITA 3051/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain (AR)For Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar (DR)
Section 133Section 200(3)Section 206Section 253Section 254(1)Section 272A(2)Section 272A(2)(c)Section 272A(2)(k)

272A(2) is not applicable as the same relates to return/ statement under section 133, 206 and 206C. The section 206 was in force only up to 31.3.2005 and therefore is not applicable in case of the assessee. The section 206 related to collection of tax and not TDS

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4661/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4660/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4659/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

TURBO TRAVELS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4961/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4961/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Turbo Travels India Pvt. The Additional बनाम/ Ltd., Commissioner Of Income V. 105, Doctor House, Tax – (Tds), Pedder Road, Range 3, Mumbai -400026. 10 Th Floor, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., Charni Road, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact 4767 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 2Section 200(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)

TDS returns on time without any delay with the prescribed income-tax authority. The ld. CIT(A) considered the submissions of the assessee and observed that in assessee’s case clause (k) of sub-section 2 of Section 272A

BHAVESH GHANSHYAM ADVANI,MUMBAI vs. CIT(INTL TAX)-1,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5808/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT-DR

TDS Certificate, but obtaining of such certificates and possession of the same by the applicant was neither required as per procedure nor as per law to file the return of income within time. It is further seen from the facts of the case that a letter bearing No. NMS2/ASHPA4344A/6311816 dated 18.12.2014 was issued to the applicant by the Compliance Management

VARAD FASHIIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2009-10

ITA 7755/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Joshi &For Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang
Section 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act should not be levied in its case for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for non filing of quarterly TDS

VARAD FASHIIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2009-10

ITA 7754/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Joshi &For Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang
Section 272A(2)(k)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act should not be levied in its case for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for non filing of quarterly TDS

ANAND RATHI SHARE AND STOCK BROKERS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4412/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: 05/08/2025
Section 271FSection 273B

272A, sub-section (1) of section (1) of section 272AA] or 25[section 272B section 272B or] 26[sub-section (1) section (1) 27[or sub-section (1A)] of section (1A)] of section 272BB or] 28 28[sub-section (1) of section 272BBB or] clause or] clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) or clause

ANAND RATHI SHARE AND STOCK BROKERS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4155/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: 05/08/2025
Section 271FSection 273B

272A, sub-section (1) of section (1) of section 272AA] or 25[section 272B section 272B or] 26[sub-section (1) section (1) 27[or sub-section (1A)] of section (1A)] of section 272BB or] 28 28[sub-section (1) of section 272BBB or] clause or] clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) or clause

ANAND RATHI SHARE AND STOCK BROKERS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4413/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: 05/08/2025
Section 271FSection 273B

272A, sub-section (1) of section (1) of section 272AA] or 25[section 272B section 272B or] 26[sub-section (1) section (1) 27[or sub-section (1A)] of section (1A)] of section 272BB or] 28 28[sub-section (1) of section 272BBB or] clause or] clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) or clause