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.

58 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai676Delhi607Kolkata415Bangalore283Chennai184Ahmedabad146Jaipur114Hyderabad89Cochin75Chandigarh61Pune58Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar29Jodhpur24Surat22Panaji18Patna17Lucknow16Jabalpur16Allahabad15Guwahati14Ranchi11Agra8Kerala8Telangana6SC5Calcutta4Dehradun3Varanasi3Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 4069Section 194C61Section 80I50TDS38Addition to Income36Section 153A31Deduction30Section 143(3)28Disallowance25Section 263

SHANKAR KASHINATH KADAM,,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 448/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Shankar Kashinath Kadam, Hingagaon Road, Kavthemahankal, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Dist. Sangli - 416405 …. Pan: Aumpk8234G Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 2(3), Sangli

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

TDS. However, payment of ₹ 2.69 crores was made to various parties without deducting tax at source. The Assessing Officer observed that as per section 194C(1) of the Act and proviso thereunder, the assessee was required to deduct tax at source or else he was required to obtain PAN of such persons as per section 194C(6

Showing 1–20 of 58 · Page 1 of 3

24
Section 14820
Section 133(6)15

YASHWANT DADASAHEB BANDIGARE,,KOLHAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX : 2,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1721/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1721/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR
Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 263Section 37(1)

TDS as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C of the Act. It is an admitted fact

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., (FORMERLY: BAJAJ AUTO FINANCE LTD.,),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objections of assessee are dismissed

ITA 356/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.356/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar
Section 201Section 271C

6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the Addl.CIT (TDS) on examination of tax audit report filed by the assessee along with return of income, noticed that the assessee had failed to deduct TDS under sections 194C

HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 394/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Deepa Khare-AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.D. Kulkarni, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 234A

194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income." 8 ITA.No.394/PUN/2025 (Hemant Enterprises) 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source, the same cannot

AJAY ENGINEERING & AGRI EQUIPMENT COMPANY,AURANGABAD vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 156/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Section 194CSection 194JSection 194J(1)Section 244ASection 263Section 40

TDS u/s. 194C : 6.1. The ld. Pr.CIT observed in the show cause notice that the AO ought to have made disallowance of Transport Expenses of Rs.37,19,441/- u/s.40(a)(ia) for failure on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source u/s.194C of the Act. The assessee submitted before the ld. Pr.CIT that the case was covered

SHABBIR HASHAM SAYYED,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

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

ITA 947/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.947/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shabbir Hasham Sayyed, New Ashiyana Enterprises, S.No.75/2, Room No.153, Sayyed Nagar, Hadapsar, Pune-411028. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Achps9564L बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-14(2), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Mrs. Shabana Parveen सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-7, Pune Dated 08.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Making A Disallowance Of Rs. 66,84,217/- By Invoking Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Without Realizing The Fact That Appellant Is An Individual & This Was The First Year Of Applicability Of Provisions Of Section 44Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Therefore For A.Y. 2012 - 2013 No Tax Was Deductible Under Chapter Xvii B & Therefore Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Do Not Have Any Application In The Appellant’S Case.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 3Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44A

TDS and the turnover is much higher than the limits prescribed u/s 44AB of the Act. The CIT(A) discussed the provisions of section 194C of the Act read with Explanation with reference to the meaning of “specified person” [para 5.4 of the CIT(A)’s order]. 6

M/S. B. M. CHAPALKAR & SONS,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

ITA 2906/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2906/Pun/2016 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. B.M. Chapalkar & Sons, 26, Dehbanoo Complex, Nashik Pune Road, Nashik Road, Nashik-422 101, Pan: Aadfb5084C .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Dhoke
Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 3(1)Section 40

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act but no disallowance can be made by invoking the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.” 4. The Ld. DR per contra submitted that it has to be ascertained whether it is the case of short deduction

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1),, PUNE vs. SHRADDHA & PRASAD JOINT VENTURE,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2665/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2665/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Pune. .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 194CSection 40

section 194C since TDS provisions are applicable to all entities except individuals and HUF having gross receipts or turnover from business or profession below the prescribed limit. 6

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -6 (3), PUNE vs. SUBHASH AND B.T. PATIL & SONS AND N.V. KHAROTE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1505/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ulhas KiniFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 194C since TDS provisions are applicable to all entities except individuals and HUF having gross receipts or turnover from business or profession below the prescribed limit. 6

WALVEKAR BROTHERS & CO,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Smt. J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 192Section 194ASection 194BSection 194CSection 194DSection 194ESection 195Section 196ASection 205

194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income” 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source, the same cannot be levied once again

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. SHRADDHA & IHP JV WANGANA PROJECT,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 36/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 194CSection 40

section 194C since TDS provisions are applicable to all entities except individuals and HUF having gross receipts or turnover from business or profession below the prescribed limit. 6

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. SHRADDHA & PRASAD JV KHURA VARODA,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 35/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 35/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 194CSection 40

section 194C since TDS provisions are applicable to all entities except individuals and HUF having gross receipts or turnover from business or profession below the prescribed limit. 6

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3),, PUNE vs. SUBHASH & B.T. PATIL & SONS & N.V.KHAROTE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1060/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 May 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Ulhas KiniFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 40

194C of the Act. (e) The assessee had failed to deduct tax from the payments made to its members the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would apply. 6. the A.O further held that the assessee had claimed TDS

ASHOK SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 763/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.763/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi & Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)

TDS. Otherwise, the assessee applied the provisions of section 194C of the Act. 3. During the First Appellate proceedings, CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee relying on the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) as well as the judgment of Madhya Pradesh

M/S. TAO PUBLISHING PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1140/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1140/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohan DeshpandeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 194CSection 40

section 194C of the Act which only mandates for effecting TDS as per the contract norm. Considering clear mentioning of the non requirement of effecting TDS, we are of the opinion that this is a case of reimbursement by Company to M/s. Imperial Packers. This fact was not appreciated by the CIT(A) at the time of deciding the issue

SHRIRAM JAWAHAR SAHAKARI SAKHAR UDYOG vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 430/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Kishore Phadke &For Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 194C of the ITA, 1961. 2. The learned CIT(A)-4, Pune and the learned AO erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that, payments made to Shriram SSK is in the nature of reimbursement of salary & wages and not for any contract work. 3. The learned CIT(A)-4, Pune and the learned

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1327/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1327/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Manoj S. Gugale 652, Shantisadan, Topkhana, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ahmednagar …. Pan: Adzpg9595N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 3, Ahmednagar

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 271(1)(c)Section 271B

TDS, refund was due to the assessee, hence it was not case where the assessee had defaulted in payment of tax. The next plea of assessee before us was that where the receipts from business of advertising agency were deposits in the bank, from which tax was deducted, then it cannot be said that the assessee was having malafide intention

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 1394/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

6. In first appeal, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata observed that the appeal is filed for the assessment year 2014-15 but the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) dated 19.07.2022 against which the appeal is filed is passed for the assessment year 2015-16 and accordingly dismissed the appeal by observing as under :- “E] Action by this Office

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 1396/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

6. In first appeal, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata observed that the appeal is filed for the assessment year 2014-15 but the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) dated 19.07.2022 against which the appeal is filed is passed for the assessment year 2015-16 and accordingly dismissed the appeal by observing as under :- “E] Action by this Office

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 1395/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

6. In first appeal, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata observed that the appeal is filed for the assessment year 2014-15 but the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) dated 19.07.2022 against which the appeal is filed is passed for the assessment year 2015-16 and accordingly dismissed the appeal by observing as under :- “E] Action by this Office