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.

340 results for “TDS”+ Section 6clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,019Delhi5,796Bangalore2,808Chennai2,471Kolkata1,710Pune1,140Ahmedabad751Hyderabad677Cochin621Patna556Jaipur470Indore420Karnataka390Raipur387Nagpur340Chandigarh322Surat253Visakhapatnam211Rajkot199Lucknow175Cuttack130Jodhpur108Amritsar102Dehradun94Telangana68Ranchi63Guwahati60Panaji58Agra57Jabalpur42SC24Calcutta19Allahabad18Kerala17Varanasi11Rajasthan9Himachal Pradesh8Punjab & Haryana5Orissa4Uttarakhand3J&K3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Gauhati1Bombay1

Key Topics

Section 194A136Section 201(1)113TDS98Section 25083Section 20180Condonation of Delay70Deduction69Section 200A56Limitation/Time-bar56Exemption

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)

TDS on such payment. Section 194C( 6) reads as under: "(6) No deduction shall be made from any sum credited

Showing 1–20 of 340 · Page 1 of 17

...
42
Section 234E33
Section 197A32

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

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

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

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

BANK OF INDIA ,PRASHEONI BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

BANK OF INDIA,SIHORA BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 104/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

DR AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WORK,NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Ms. Shraddha BavdekarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

6, NW Kailash Nagar, Post Bhagwan Nagar Manewada Road, Nagpur 440 027 Appellant\nPAN – AADTP1266E\nIncome Tax Officer v/s Respondent\nWard-1, Nagpur\nAssessee by : Ms. Shraddha Bavdekar\nRevenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe\nDate of Hearing – 05/03/2025\nDate of Order – 21/03/2025\nPER K.M. ROY, A.M.\nORDER\nThe present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the\nimpugned order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

section 133(6) and confirmed of providing services to the assessee company and receipt of payment from it. They also provided copy of agreement, their bank statements and audited financial statements. In the assessment order Id. AO held that though the two companies have shown this amount as income in their P&L a/c but they are majorly engaged

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 286/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y.Marathe, Sr.Dr
Section 200Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

section 234E of the Sunilkumar Rajendra Rai vs TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 Act cannot be levied for the period prior to 01.06.2015, because, there was no enabling provision to levy such late fee. 6

SANJAY GANDHI SMRUTI VIDYA MANDIR ,HINGANGHAT, WARDHA vs. ITO TDS WD 52(1), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 149/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 1Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

ACIT, CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE,, CHANDRAPUR vs. SHRI AVEREL GANGADHAR SHETTY, CHANDRAPUR

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 193/NAG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Parth Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 193/Nag/2017 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr Abhay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Kailash Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

TDS wrongly made twice amounting to Rs.20,65,367/-, the appellant has not been able to satisfactorily file reconciliation statement and explain the nature of transaction. Therefore, addition amounting to Rs.20,65,367/- out of total addition of Rs.4,45,75,433/- is confirmed. A0 is directed to delete the remaining addition. Ground of appeal is Partly Allowed. (Emphasis supplied

ASHWIN SURESH CHANDAK,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD, TDS 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 107/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 220Section 220(2)Section 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

DAMMANI INDUSTRIES,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD, TDS 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 121/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 220Section 220(2)Section 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

BANK OF INDIA, ARMORI ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 94/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sadrani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

BANK OF INDIA,UMRED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC.TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 93/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sadrani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

BANK OF INDIA, PANCHGAON,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 95/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Sadrani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 200ASection 234E

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

6 Bank of India Vs JCIT(TDS) ITA No.003 & 008/NAG/2023 NO. 4628 OF 2023], we are heedful to state that, dismissal of appeals on technical ground of limitation were unwarranted in these cases because while dealing with tax litigation, in the words of Hon’ble Lordships, the appellate authorities under the Act are a quasi-judicial authority and they

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

6 Bank of India Vs JCIT(TDS) ITA No.003 & 008/NAG/2023 NO. 4628 OF 2023], we are heedful to state that, dismissal of appeals on technical ground of limitation were unwarranted in these cases because while dealing with tax litigation, in the words of Hon’ble Lordships, the appellate authorities under the Act are a quasi-judicial authority and they

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

6 Bank of India Vs JCIT(TDS) ITA No.003 & 008/NAG/2023 NO. 4628 OF 2023], we are heedful to state that, dismissal of appeals on technical ground of limitation were unwarranted in these cases because while dealing with tax litigation, in the words of Hon’ble Lordships, the appellate authorities under the Act are a quasi-judicial authority and they