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.

17 results for “TDS”+ Section 206C(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore240Pune236Delhi178Chennai155Mumbai62Kolkata46Raipur44Cochin28Ahmedabad26Karnataka26Jodhpur20Jaipur18Rajkot17Nagpur16Indore14Surat10Panaji10Dehradun8Lucknow8Himachal Pradesh6Chandigarh4Amritsar4Guwahati4Hyderabad3Visakhapatnam3Cuttack2Telangana2SC1Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 206C27Section 206C(6)23TDS17Section 206C(7)16Section 20612Section 234E8Section 206C(3)3Section 206C(1)3Section 143(3)2Penalty

SHRI NIRMAL RAJENDRA JAGETIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO (TDS-3), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(3)Section 234E

206C(1) of the Act\nassessee is under an obligations to collect TCS. Due to non-collection of\nTCS, the assessee was treated as \"Assessee in default\". The amount of such\nTCS is determined at Rs. 12,51,355/- by passing the order under Section\n206(C) of the Act dated 17/3/2017.\n9. The assessing officer also noticed that

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

2
ITA 51/RJT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

TDS) [2015] 62 taxmann.com 59/70 SOT 167 (Bang.-Trib), the ITAT observed as below:- "Section 206C(1A) mandates that any person responsible for collecting tax under section 206C(1

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 52/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

TDS) [2015] 62 taxmann.com 59/70 SOT 167 (Bang.-Trib), the ITAT observed as below:- "Section 206C(1A) mandates that any person responsible for collecting tax under section 206C(1

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 53/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

TDS) [2015] 62 taxmann.com 59/70 SOT 167 (Bang.-Trib), the ITAT observed as below:- "Section 206C(1A) mandates that any person responsible for collecting tax under section 206C(1

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

ITA 54/RJT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

TDS) [2015] 62 taxmann.com 59/70 SOT 167 (Bang.-Trib), the ITAT observed as below:- "Section 206C(1A) mandates that any person responsible for collecting tax under section 206C(1

SUNDERLAL CHOTMAL JAIN,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, TDS WARD-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2/RJT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jamnagar. However The Assessing Officer Issued A Show Cause Notice Dated 18-08-2015, 01-06-2016 That The Assessee Has Not Collected Tcs To The Tune Of Rs. 4,28,432/- Sale Of Scraps For The For The Relevant Assessment Year 2012-13 & Assesse Has Not Filed Statement In Form 27Eq.

Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

1% and also levied interest u/s. 206C of the Act. However sub-section (1A) of section 206C does not provide for any time limit within which, such declaration is to be filed by the buyer. However time limit is prescribed in Rule 37C of the I.T. Rules. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT (TDS

SHRI FALGUN N. SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS-2, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 262/RJT/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Shri Falgun N. Sheth Ito, Tds-2 Prop. Of Falgun Steel Traders Vs Rajkot. 10-Mavdi Plot Gondal Road Rajkot. Pan : Aexps 3307 M

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld.DR
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(6)Section 206C(7)Section 250(6)

1) of the Act. The AO accordingly treated the assessee as ‘assessee-in- default’ for not making TCS and determined liability of the assessee for non-collection of TCS under section 206C(6) of Rs.2,19,556/- and interest liability for late collection under section 206C(7) of the Act at Rs.1,58,080/-. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER,TDS-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR vs. SAMPATLAL BADRILAL SOMANI, JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 298/RJT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.298/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Tds – 3, Vs. Sampatlal Badrilal Somani 2Nd Floor, Taranjali Proprietor Of S. B. Metal Udyog, Buildign, P. N. Marg, Plot No. 4/A/1, Nr. Kriti Weight Jamnagar – 361008 Bridge, Shanker Tekri, Udyognagar, Jamnagar – 361004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahhps0245D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Chetan Agarwal &
Section 143(3)Section 206CSection 206C(3)Section 206C(6)

section 206C(6) & 206C(7) of the Income tax Act, 1961, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who has allowed the appeal of the assessee, observing as follows: 3. Ground no.1 is general and hence, not adjudicated separately. The same is dismissed. Ground no. 2,3,4, and 5 are directed against the grievance

GOPALLAL RAMPRASAD KABRA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is being restored to the file of ITO (TDS) with the above directions

ITA 243/RJT/2022[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot15 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal. Total Tax Effect 28,72,848/-

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)Section 250

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: I.T.A No. 243/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Gopallal Ramprasad Kabra vs. ITO Sr. No. Grounds of Appeal Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal (see note below) 1 The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE ITO(TDS), WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 228/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 147/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,DIST. RAJKOT vs. ITO(TDS), WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 227/RJT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

ITA 148/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr
Section 206

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

VIMALBHAI MOHANBHAI NARIYA PROP. S.M. CORPORATION,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, , JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 359/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 359/Rjt/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri V. P. Sutaria, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 234ESection 234eSection 260CSection 44A

TDS. iii. It is correct that as per Sec. 206C, TCS Return is required to be filed within the prescribed time as per rule 31AA of the Income Tax Rules. It seems that as per rule 31AA(4)(v) the details of persons who have submitted declaration under sub section (1A) of section 206C is to be given in Form

THE ITO(TDS)-3, JAMNAGAR vs. SHRI NIRMAL RAJENDRA JAGETIYA, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 109/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: The Specified Authorities As Per Prescribed Manner In The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Upheld The Order Of The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 268A

TDS)-3, Room No. Shri Nirmal Rajendra 208, 2nd Floor, Tarangali Jagetiya, Prop: of Manish Building, P.N. Marg, Vs Metal Corporation, Shed Jamnagar No. 435A, GIDC, STU, (Appellant) Jamnagar (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 01-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 14-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- This

VISHAL ENTERPRISES,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, TDS - 3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 778/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.778/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vishal Enterprise Vs. Income-Tax Officer,Tds-3, 3010-3012, Phase –Iii Gidc, Jamanagar. Jamnagar -361004, Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagfv6139H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrwal, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 206C(6)

TDS-3, 3010-3012, Phase –III GIDC, Jamanagar. Jamnagar -361004, Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAGFV6139H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agrwal, Ld. A.R. Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28/02 /2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. ARJUNLAL SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining

THE ITO(TDS)-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR vs. SHRI PURANMAL JAMANLAL KABRA, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 107/RJT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 206C(6)Section 268A

206C(6)/206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. I.T.A No. 107/Rjt/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 ITO (TDS)-3 vs. Shri Puranmal Jamanlal Kabra 2. At the outset, after going through the grounds of appeal and the impugned orders of the Revenue authorities below, a query was raised by the Bench