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.

13 results for “TDS”+ Section 201(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,585Delhi1,545Bangalore1,107Chennai652Kolkata465Karnataka256Pune160Jaipur160Nagpur142Raipur138Ahmedabad121Hyderabad103Indore103Cochin96Chandigarh60Jodhpur45Surat44Rajkot41Lucknow40Telangana27Kerala26Panaji26Visakhapatnam22Cuttack20Patna17Agra17Amritsar16SC13Dehradun10Jabalpur10Guwahati9Ranchi9Himachal Pradesh6Varanasi4Rajasthan3Orissa3J&K1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 20110Section 19410TDS10Section 2449Section 271C9Section 194A6Section 244A5Section 194H4Section 201(1)3Survey u/s 133A

M/S US TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-007934-007934 - 2011Supreme Court10 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Section 201Section 271C

201(1A) of the Act,   1961   levied   penal   interest   of   Rs. 4,97,920/­   for   the   period   of   delay   in remittance   of   TDS.   On   09.10.2003,   the Additional   Commissioner   of   Income   Tax issued a show cause notice proposing to levy penalty under Section 271C of the amount equal to TDS. That the assessee replied to the Page 3

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), KANPUR vs. CANARA BANK

The appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-006020-006020 - 2018Supreme Court02 Jul 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 194A
3
Deduction3
Section 3

TDS),   Kanpur   and   Anr.   vs. Canara   Bank   wherein   the   judgment   of   the   High   Court   dated 04.04.2016 in ITA No. 64 of 2016 has been questioned. 4 3.   The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority  (NOIDA), hereinafter referred to as “Authority” has been constituted by Notification dated 17.04.1976 issued under Section 3 of the Uttar   Pradesh   Industrial   Area   Development   Act,   1976 hereinafter

SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT CO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

C.A. No.-007865-007865 - 2009Supreme Court29 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Section 40

201. Putting it differently, when the obligation of Section 194C of the Act is the foundation of the consequence provided by Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, reference to the former is inevitable in interpretation of the latter. 16.11. In view of the above, reference to the definition of the term “paid” in Section

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

C.A. No.-005114-005114 - 2007Supreme Court25 Mar 2009
Section 133ASection 192(1)Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(ii)

3) of section 200.” Penalty for Failure to Deduct Tax at Source: “Section 271C: (1) If any person fails to – (a) Deduct the whole or any part of the tax as required by or under the provisions of Chapter XVII-B; or (b) Pay the whole or any part of the tax as required by or under, - (i) Sub-section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

C.A. No.-003544-003544 - 1998Supreme Court29 Nov 2001
For Respondent: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Section 194ASection 2Section 201Section 244Section 244(1)Section 244ASection 256(1)

TDS) found that the D.D.A. failed to deduct income-tax at source on the payment of interest made to the buyers as provided under Section 194A of the Income-tax Act. Accordingly, a demand was raised for the Assessment Years 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-1990. An appeal to C.I.T. failed and it was found that the Assessing Officer

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

3) of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement [“DTAA”], between India and USA, and upon applying section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, found that what was in fact transferred in the transaction between the parties was copyright which attracted the payment of royalty and thus, it was required that tax be deducted at source by the Indian importer

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. CENTURY BUILDING INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD

C.A. No.-006820-006820 - 2005Supreme Court10 Aug 2007
For Respondent: M/s. Century Building Industries Pvt. Ltd
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

3 The A.O. found that when interest was paid by cheques issued by the company to the creditor, TDS was not deducted at source by the assessee on the interest payments as required under Section 194A(1) of the Act and, therefore, the A.O. applied the provisions of Section 201

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD

C.A. No.-003725-003725 - 2007Supreme Court04 Jan 2008
For Respondent: Infosys Technologies Ltd
Section 17(2)(iii)Section 192

3 of 6 (ii) any annuity or pension; (iii) any gratuity; (iv) any fees, commissions, perquisites or profits in lieu of or in addition to any salary or wages; (v) any advance of salary; (va) any payment received by an employee in respect of any period of leave not availed of by him; (vi) the annual accretion to the balance

THE DIR. PRASAR BHARATI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTH

C.A. No.-003496-003497 - 2018Supreme Court03 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE

Section 194HSection 201(1)

3 person, advertiser or representative of any advertiser for whom it may be acting or has acted as an advertising agency. The agreement also provided the manner, mode and the time within which the payment was to be made by the Agency to the appellant. The failure to make the payment was to result in losing the accredited status

M/S JAPAN AIRLINES CO.LTD. vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI

C.A. No.-009875-009875 - 2013Supreme Court04 Aug 2015
Section 194

3 of 18 Page 4 JUDGMENT for Airports and Air Navigation Services. All member States abide by the guidelines and rules prescribed for various charges to be levied for facilities and services provided including landing/parking charges. 5. The AAI under the provisions of the Airport Authority of India Act, 1994 has been authorized to fix and collect charges for landing

M/S. HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVREGE P.LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed with no

C.A. No.-003765-003765 - 2007Supreme Court16 Aug 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax
Section 194Section 194CSection 201Section 254

3 same by the appellant was dismissed by the High Court on 21.5.2004; the point based on Ground No. 7 was not taken up in the appeal preferred by the appellant in the High Court. The High Court further held that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal’s order dated 12.7.2002 got itself merged into the order passed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA XII vs. M/S CALCUTTA EXPORT COMPANY

C.A. No.-004339-004340 - 2018Supreme Court24 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL

201 8 @ (DIARY No. 20508 OF 2017) CIVIL APPEAL No. 4515 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 23081 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL No. 4502 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 22584 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL No. 4503 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 23489 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is dismissed

C.A. No.-008181-008181 - 2022Supreme Court04 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA

Section 192Section 192(1)Section 201

TDS on this payment. All the same, LTC has to be availed by an employee within certain limitations, prescribed by the law. Firstly, the travel must be done from one designated place in India to another designated place within India. In other words, LTC is not for a foreign travel. Secondly, LTC is given for the shortest route between these