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.

40 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai683Delhi648Kolkata431Bangalore284Chennai184Ahmedabad146Jaipur114Hyderabad90Cochin75Chandigarh62Pune59Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar30Jodhpur24Surat22Patna18Panaji18Jabalpur16Lucknow16Allahabad15Ranchi14Guwahati14Agra8Kerala8Telangana7Calcutta6SC5Dehradun4Varanasi3Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 194C54Section 201(1)43TDS30Section 4028Deduction26Section 194C(6)24Section 143(3)24Addition to Income19Section 80I18Disallowance

ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 143(1)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Section 194C(7) have to be read together to extend the immunity from TDS, our attention is drawn to the fact that though the Finance Act, (N0.2) 2009 introduced, inter alia, Sec. 194C(6) and 194C(7), similar and analogous provision had been very much in existence under proviso 2 and 3

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

16
Section 14714
Section 153A13

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201

TDS deducted in view of the amendments introduced in Section 194C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Finance

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 125/NAG/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 122/NAG/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 123/NAG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 121/NAG/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 120/NAG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 124/NAG/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Apr 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri K. P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 201(1)

TDS as per section 194C of the Act. In such facts, the action of the ld. A.O. of raising the demand for tax and interest on the appellant u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act is held to be erroneous and is therefore directed to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily

M/S PYRAMID DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. JOINT CIT RANGE 1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 343/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri U.U. Kasar
Section 131Section 133ASection 40A(3)

3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also made addition of penalty expenses of ` 1,19,230, rent of ` 1,98,450 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct TDS under section 194I of the Act, and also disallowed the amount of ` 2,57,530 towards advertisement expenses 6 M/s. Pyramid Developers M/s. Pyramid Arcade

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, NAGPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 76/NAG/2017[2014-115]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2023AY 2014-115

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya D. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that the assessee should carriages. However, the ld. CIT(A) merely made a reference to the submissions of the assessee that it had complied with the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act read with Rule

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 75/NAG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya D. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that the assessee should carriages. However, the ld. CIT(A) merely made a reference to the submissions of the assessee that it had complied with the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act read with Rule

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 73/NAG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya D. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that the assessee should carriages. However, the ld. CIT(A) merely made a reference to the submissions of the assessee that it had complied with the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act read with Rule

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 74/NAG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya D. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201(1)

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that the assessee should carriages. However, the ld. CIT(A) merely made a reference to the submissions of the assessee that it had complied with the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act read with Rule

KHALID NADEEM ALLARAKHA,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 9/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43A(3)

section 194C were not applicable. The learned Counsel for assessee has also placed reliance from the law settled in by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in CIT v/s Krishak Bharati Co-op. Ltd., (2012) 349 ITR 68 (Guj.). The learned Departmental Representative has strongly placed reliance on the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in question

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. T.D.S. WARD 2-(1), NAGPUR

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

ITA 102/NAG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Baral, Senior DR
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 206CSection 206C(7)

Section 194C and that no TDS was deductible on same. 3. (a) That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts

ASTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,AMRAVATI CIR.AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI vs. SHRI AKASH RAMESHWAR PANPALIA,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 446/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh. Mahavir Singhacit, Vs Akash Rameshwar Panpalia, Amravati Circle, Ward No.14, Dhamangaon Amravati, Aayakar Railway, Distt.-Amravati–4447–9. Bhawan, Ambapeth, Pan–Aiopp8687J Amravati–444601. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh.R.K.Baral, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh.K.P.Dewani, Adv. Date Of Hearing 08.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 08.03.2018

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)Section 44A

TDS and the payments for the same were made for more than Rs.20,000/– in a single day in cash, contravening section 194C and 40A(3

M/S ATASHA ASHIRWAD BUILDERS,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T (TDS) RANGE 1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 480/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 206C(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

194C, 194I, 194J, 194H of the Act and also has an obligation to furnish quarterly statements of TDS in Form No. 26Q within the prescribed due dates. The said details by way of a tabular form is reflected in para 2 of the order of Addl. CIT. We note that the Addl. CIT imposed penalty u/s. 272A

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

3,41,27,8737- 28 Smt. AanjuSaraf claimed and on balance tax was not deducted, since no tax is required to be deducted thereon u/s 194C. TDS has been deducted on cash payments also. The AO has failed to bring on record any infirmity or discrepancy in the vouchers/bills or any record in relation to the claim of such expenditure

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

3,41,27,8737- 28 Smt. AanjuSaraf claimed and on balance tax was not deducted, since no tax is required to be deducted thereon u/s 194C. TDS has been deducted on cash payments also. The AO has failed to bring on record any infirmity or discrepancy in the vouchers/bills or any record in relation to the claim of such expenditure

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

3,41,27,8737- 28 Smt. AanjuSaraf claimed and on balance tax was not deducted, since no tax is required to be deducted thereon u/s 194C. TDS has been deducted on cash payments also. The AO has failed to bring on record any infirmity or discrepancy in the vouchers/bills or any record in relation to the claim of such expenditure