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.

42 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai674Delhi630Kolkata434Bangalore284Chennai184Ahmedabad144Jaipur114Hyderabad89Cochin75Chandigarh62Pune58Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar30Jodhpur24Surat22Patna18Panaji18Jabalpur16Lucknow16Allahabad15Ranchi14Guwahati14Agra8Kerala8Telangana7Calcutta5SC5Dehradun4Varanasi3Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 194C44Section 4039Addition to Income35TDS34Section 143(3)30Section 201(1)25Disallowance21Deduction19Section 20114Section 263

VIPULKUMAR HEMANTLAL POPAT, UPLETA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 321/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.321/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010

For Appellant: None (Witten Submission)For Respondent: Shri S.N. Kabra, Sr.DR
Section 194CSection 194C(5)Section 194C(6)Section 40

TDS under section 194C of the Act if the payment the does not exceed ₹20,000.00 However we note that in all the cases the payment is exceeding ₹20,000 therefore we are not in agreement with the contention of the learned AR for the assessee. 8.3 Regarding the applicability of 1st proviso to section 194C(5

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

11
Section 194J8
Survey u/s 133A8

ITO WARD 3(1)(4), RAJKOT-STATION- AMRELI, AMRELI, GUJARAT vs. AVADH AGRI EXPORTS, AMRELI, GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 816/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 172Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 250

TDS is confined to payments made to any "resident". On the other hand, section 172 operates in the area of computation of profits from shipping business of non-residents. Thus, there is no overlapping in the areas of operation of these sections. There would, however, be cases where payments are made to shipping agents of non-resident ship-owners

VIPULKUMAR HEMANTLAL POPAT, UPLETA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 72/RJT/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 72/Rjt/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 Vipul H. Popat, I.T.O., Prop. Mathav Agro Industri, Vs. Tds-1, Nilkanthkhandskampound, Rajkot. Dhoraji Road, Upleta, Rajkot. C/O D.R Adhia “Om Shri Padamlaya”, Nr. Trikamrayji Haweli, 16-Jagnath Plot, Dr.Yagnik Road, Opp. Imperial Hotel, Rajkot-360001

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri BD Gupta, CIT. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

5. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT (A). 6. The assessee before the learned CIT (A) submitted that the ITO-TDS raised demand under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act for not deducting tax at source under the provisions of section 194C

ASHOKKUMAR PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,PORBANDAR vs. THE PR. CIT, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appear of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.83/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Ashokkumar Projects India P. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax, 4Th Floor, Manek Centre, P.N. Cholera Arcade, M.G. Road Opposite, Bhaveshwar Mahadev Marg, Jamnagar - 361008 Temple, Porbandar – 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamca5891Q (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 194CSection 263Section 40

5)CIT v. United Rice Land Ltd. [2010] 322 ITR 594. The ld. Counsel also submitted that that mere non-compliance of PF/ESI Act does not result in a change in nature of the payment made to Casual workers, as contractual payment, so as to attract TDS u/s. 194C of the Act. Section

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

ITA 50/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Thacker, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 250

TDS) 8.5 In view of the facts of the instant case of the assessee and the judicial the precedents on subject, we are of the considered view that payments are covered under section 194C of the Act, and not under section 194J of the Act. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

ITA 49/RJT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Thacker, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 250

TDS) 8.5 In view of the facts of the instant case of the assessee and the judicial the precedents on subject, we are of the considered view that payments are covered under section 194C of the Act, and not under section 194J of the Act. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, JUNAGADH vs. M/S KESHODWALA FOODS., VERAVAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1133/RJT/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1133/Rjt/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08) D.C.I.T, बनाम/ M/S Keshodwala Foods, Circle-1, 305-G.I.D.C. Industrial Vs. Junagadh. Estate, Somnath Road, Veraval. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfk6651Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ranjit Singh Cit. D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 24/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Dated 16/06/2010, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 08/12/2009 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2007- 08. A.Y. 2007-08 The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Ranjit Singh CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 197

194C of the Act. The assessee paid the charges to Shri Ramjibhai Kanjibhai Cham whereas the bills for the processing charges were raised by M/s Cham trading organization. The assessee in support of its contention for non-deduction of TDS filed two certificates issued under section 197 of the Act for nil deduction dated 05/09/2006 for Rs.50 lakhs and 12/01/2007

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR. TDS,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 375/RJT/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.628/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.375/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 M/S. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 202, Arpan Complex, Opp. Vs. Tds Circle, Swaminarayan Mandir, Rajkot. Kalavad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Aabcc8197Q

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS u/s 194C and 194J of the Act. The relevant contents of the AO findings and the demand raised under section 201(1)/(1A) of the Act is set out as under: 10.1 Non-deduction of tax from payments of Labour Charges: As already stated in the foregoing paras, the assessee has made payments of labour charges, royalty, bank guarantee

THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 628/RJT/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.628/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.375/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 M/S. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 202, Arpan Complex, Opp. Vs. Tds Circle, Swaminarayan Mandir, Rajkot. Kalavad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Aabcc8197Q

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS u/s 194C and 194J of the Act. The relevant contents of the AO findings and the demand raised under section 201(1)/(1A) of the Act is set out as under: 10.1 Non-deduction of tax from payments of Labour Charges: As already stated in the foregoing paras, the assessee has made payments of labour charges, royalty, bank guarantee

AMITSINH NANABHA RANA,,WANKANER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, MORBI

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

ITA 107/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2012-13 Amitsinh Nababha Rana Ito, Ward-1 At. Divijay Nagar Vs Morbi. Wankaner. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta. Sr.DR
Section 194C

Section Name of the party Amount TDS 194A Gruh Finance Ltd. 6895 690 194C IVRCL Ltd. 2091670 20918 193 Sahara India Real 2595 519 194D Bajaj Allianz Life 80259 8026 2181419 30513 4. On question by the AO, the assessee submitted that it has executed the contract which was awarded by the company namely IVRCL LTD. based in Hyderabad

M/S MARUTINANDAN CONSTRUCTION,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 737/RJT/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Written submission (Shri D.R.Adhia –For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, Sr.DR
Section 194CSection 40

5. On the other hand the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the learned DR and perused the materials available on record. The assessee in the case on hand has claimed an expense of Rs. 39,42,522/- under various heads but without deducting TDS u/s 194C r.w.s

THE DCIT, CIRCLE TDS,, RAJKOT vs. M\S. APRICOT FOODS PVT. LTD. , METODA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

ITA 226/RJT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 194CSection 194HSection 201(1)

section 194C." 6.5 In view of the discussions in the preceding paragraphs and judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat, the claim of the assessee is found to be correct. Therefore, the AO is directed to delete the TDS default u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 194C of the Act amounting to Rs.46,68,151/-. Thus, ground

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and we hold that Ld

ITA 406/RJT/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)

TDS u/s. 194C or u/s. 194J. 6. Section 194C contemplate: 194C. (1) Any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident (hereafter in this section referred to as the contractor85) for carrying out any work (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and a specified person shall

THE DCIT, CIRCLE (TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. M/S. GOPAL SNACKS P. LTD., RAJKOT, VILLAGE METODA, TAL. LODHIKA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

ITA 119/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS has been fixed upon the assessee in any of the other years. In assessment u/s 143(3) also no disallowance has been made u/s 40(a)(la). I also find merit in reliance of assessee on decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in case of Girnar Food and beverages (supra), Decision of Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad in case

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. SENOR METALS PVT. LTD., JAMNAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 260/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 260/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, C.I.T.D.R
Section 36Section 40Section 43(5)

section 43(5). It is immaterial whether transaction is carried out at the recognized stock exchange or not. Even the circular of CBDT cited in the assessment order states that once it is established that the assessee has entered in the transaction of the commodity that they deal the other technical details have no material impact. Hence, this reasoning

SHRI JAY KHODIYAR MAJOOR S M LTD.,AT CHHALANKA, TAL. VISAVADAR, DIST. JUNAGADH vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee dismissed

ITA 178/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

194C of the Act, TDS should have been deducted on aforesaid contract expenses. However, as per Tax Audit Report, TDS had not been deducted by the assessee. Therefore, in view of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% of the contract expenses should have been disallowed on account of non-deduction of tax at source. However, the assessee

INTERMARK SHIPPING AGENCIES P. LTD.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-4,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 640/RJT/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 640/Rjt/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Intermark Shipping Ito Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Tds-4, Gandhidham, Ii Floor, Ajanta Comm. Plot No. 32, Sector-3, Center No. 1, Plot No. Gandhidham, Kachchh 277/278, Ward 12-B Gandhidham (Kutch) Pan No. Aaa Ci5 689 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Sontakka, Dr Assessee By : Shri M. J. Ranpura, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sontakka, DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 210(1)Section 9

TDS is applicable on Intermark Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO AY 2010-11 such reimbursement amount as the case made out by the assessee before the Revenue. However, such plea of the assessee was not found tenable. The Ld. AO was of the view that the certificate issued by the IT authority in favour of Mundra Port and Special

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 , RAJKOT vs. ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING(INDIA) PVT.LTD. (SWISS SINGAPORE INDIA PVT. LTD.), GANDHIDHAM

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

ITA 284/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

5(2)(b) read with section 9(1)(i) Whether since non-resident agents had rendered their services outside India and all agents had overseas offices and they were not having any permanent establishment in India, commission paid to them was not liable to tax in India Held, yes [Paras 3 and 4] [In favour of assessee)." 25. In view

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. DCIT-ACIT CENT-2 RKT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 226/RJT/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

5(2)(b) read with section 9(1)(i) Whether since non-resident agents had rendered their services outside India and all agents had overseas offices and they were not having any permanent establishment in India, commission paid to them was not liable to tax in India Held, yes [Paras 3 and 4] [In favour of assessee)." 25. In view

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, GANDHIHDAM, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARAT

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

ITA 225/RJT/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

5(2)(b) read with section 9(1)(i) Whether since non-resident agents had rendered their services outside India and all agents had overseas offices and they were not having any permanent establishment in India, commission paid to them was not liable to tax in India Held, yes [Paras 3 and 4] [In favour of assessee)." 25. In view