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(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai676Delhi607Kolkata415Bangalore283Chennai184Ahmedabad146Jaipur114Hyderabad89Cochin75Chandigarh61Pune58Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar29Jodhpur24Surat22Panaji18Patna17Lucknow16Jabalpur16Allahabad15Guwahati14Ranchi11Agra8Kerala8Telangana6SC5Calcutta4Dehradun3Varanasi3Rajasthan2A.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 on the payment to the contractor and engaged in the business of plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages as provided under section 194C(6

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

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

11
Section 194J8
Survey u/s 133A8

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)

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

194C of the Act. But the assessee has failed to deduct TDS on expenses aggregating to Rs. 21,84,141/- and thus violated the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. As such, an amount of Rs.6,55,242/-, being 30% of Rs.21,84,141/- is required to be disallowed under section 40(a) (ia) of the Act.Therefore

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 on these payments have been made under section 194C of the Act. However, the nature of payments made to M/s Suzlon Group Companies is in lieu of technical services rendered for maintenance of windmills. Therefore, the AO held that the payment is in the nature of “fee for technical services” or “managerial services” and taxes are required

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 on these payments have been made under section 194C of the Act. However, the nature of payments made to M/s Suzlon Group Companies is in lieu of technical services rendered for maintenance of windmills. Therefore, the AO held that the payment is in the nature of “fee for technical services” or “managerial services” and taxes are required

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

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

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

6. The SAFCO is an international company having permanent address of 22, 34Gil Nonhyun-Ro, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, Korea, Tel: 82-2-572-5494, Fax: 82- 2-572-5495 and not having any direct business connection with India. Accordingly, section 195 is not applicable for deducting TDS on this payment. Further all the payment is made in foreign currency

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)

6 grounds of appeal, but the interconnected issue is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 9,35,18,299/- and Rs. 3,36,66,587/- on account of non-deduction of TDS and interest thereon under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. 3. Briefly stated facts are that

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)

6 grounds of appeal, but the interconnected issue is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 9,35,18,299/- and Rs. 3,36,66,587/- on account of non-deduction of TDS and interest thereon under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. 3. Briefly stated facts are that

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

6 Rs.12,01,860under the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus, the learned CIT-A confirmed the addition made by the AO to the tune of Rs.12,01,860.00 after giving part relief of Rs.8,90,000.00 only. 13. From the preceding discussion, we note that there is no ambiguity to the fact that the amount

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

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. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance was made by the AO on account of non-deduction

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)

194C) & of Rs. 3.93.669/- (194H), since the above mentioned TDS defaults were deleted by the Hon'ble CIT(A). 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be cancelled and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above fact. 6. Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record including

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

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)

TDS under Section 194C of the Act and there was no reason why disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was not made while framing the impugned assessment year. Further, in absence of any specific restriction on the powers of Ld. PCIT during the course of 263 proceedings itself, which were admittedly not barred by jurisdiction

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

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 437/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel and Astha Maniar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

Section 194C(6) of the Act is not applicable in respect of such payment provided there is less than 10 Trucks and in these circumstances, there is no need to deduct TDS

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 438/RJT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel and Astha Maniar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

Section 194C(6) of the Act is not applicable in respect of such payment provided there is less than 10 Trucks and in these circumstances, there is no need to deduct TDS

SHREE SAMARTH ELECTRICALS PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

ITA 610/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, ld.CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

194C of Income-tax Act. GojijyaBhikhubhai and Others ITA No.609, 610 and 612/RJT/2024 (AY :2018-19) 9 There were no documentary evidences available on records from which it can be ascertained whether you have deducted any TDS on the said payments. As you have failed to deduct / deposit TDS on expenditure

SHREE SAMARTH SWITCHGEAR AND TRANSMISSION PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

ITA 609/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, ld.CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

194C of Income-tax Act. GojijyaBhikhubhai and Others ITA No.609, 610 and 612/RJT/2024 (AY :2018-19) 9 There were no documentary evidences available on records from which it can be ascertained whether you have deducted any TDS on the said payments. As you have failed to deduct / deposit TDS on expenditure