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.

16 results for “TDS”+ Section 194Hclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai281Delhi265Bangalore87Chennai81Kolkata80Indore37Jaipur28Pune16Hyderabad15Ahmedabad12Chandigarh12Karnataka12Rajkot11Patna5Lucknow4Visakhapatnam3Guwahati3Nagpur3SC3Amritsar2Calcutta2Kerala2Jodhpur2Panaji1Telangana1Cochin1Ranchi1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)21Section 194H15Deduction12TDS9Addition to Income8Section 2017Section 1486Disallowance5Section 1474Section 133(6)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 735/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

4
Section 324
Section 36(1)(va)4

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 730/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 733/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 734/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 729/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD), PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 731/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS,, PUNE vs. M/S. VODAFONE IDEA LTD, (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD),, PUNE

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 732/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.729 To 735/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194H of the Act as held by the Assessing Officer and erred in not holding the Appellant as an „assessee in default‟ for the non deduction of tax at source u/s. 201(1) r.w.s. 194H of the I.T. Act 1961. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in a law, the order passed

SARIKA VITTHAL GUND,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1835/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 69A

section 66 can be made even for an unexplained credit amount on account of supply of goods, and not necessarily only for a cash credit SLP dismissed by Supreme Court on account of delay." 9.7 There is no documentary evidence on record to explain the sources of the credit entries. Further, as per the normal standard operating procedure no bank

SARIKA VITTHAL GUND,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1836/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 69A

section 66 can be made even for an unexplained credit amount on account of supply of goods, and not necessarily only for a cash credit SLP dismissed by Supreme Court on account of delay." 9.7 There is no documentary evidence on record to explain the sources of the credit entries. Further, as per the normal standard operating procedure no bank

M/S CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 356/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 32Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date of respective statutes, the assessee is not entitled to claim benefit of deduction from the total income. Therefore, in our opinion, essential condition for claiming such deduction if such amounts are deposited on or before due date

M/S CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 357/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 32Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date of respective statutes, the assessee is not entitled to claim benefit of deduction from the total income. Therefore, in our opinion, essential condition for claiming such deduction if such amounts are deposited on or before due date

M/S CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 354/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 32Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date of respective statutes, the assessee is not entitled to claim benefit of deduction from the total income. Therefore, in our opinion, essential condition for claiming such deduction if such amounts are deposited on or before due date

M/S CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 355/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 32Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date of respective statutes, the assessee is not entitled to claim benefit of deduction from the total income. Therefore, in our opinion, essential condition for claiming such deduction if such amounts are deposited on or before due date

FARUK RAFIK MUJAWAR,ICHALKARANJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ICHALKARANJI

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

ITA 1344/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Uodol Raj Singh
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194HSection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 274Section 44A

TDS was deducted u/s 194H of the IT Act and the return of income has not been furnished, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued on 31.03.2022 to the assessee. In response to this notice, the assessee furnished his return of income disclosing capital gain from sale of immovable property

BHADANES HITECH TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1289/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 68

194H of the Act. In this context, the assessee on 07/03/2016 filed letter stating that it has lots of sale agents since the payment made to individual agent during the financial year 2012-13 is below ₹ 5,000/-, therefore tax has not been deducted on commission payments. As commission payment did not attract TDS provisions, it had also not maintained

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,,AURANGABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -2,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 784/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 263Section 40

194H. The 4 Wockhardt Limited Audit Report of the assessee divulged that there was non deduction of tax at source and also short deduction of tax at source amounting to Rs.5,39,94,141/-. As against that, the assessee had added back only a sum of Rs.2,37,81,782/- u/s.40(a). This, in the opinion of the ld. PCIT