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.

3 results for “TDS”+ Section 244Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai268Delhi157Bangalore86Kolkata51Chennai23Karnataka22Ahmedabad14Pune7Chandigarh7Jaipur6Hyderabad4Cochin4Dehradun4Lucknow4SC3Himachal Pradesh2Cuttack1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 24413Section 244A5Section 2412Section 2012TDS2

M/S K LAKSHMANYA AND COMPANY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order

C.A. No.-004335-004335 - 2012Supreme Court01 Nov 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

Section 241Section 244

244A. It found that the expression “refund of any amount” used by Section 240 and 244 would include not only tax and penalty but interest also. It was, therefore, held that the clear intention of Parliament is that the right to interest will compensate the assessee for the excess payment during the intervening period when the assessee did not have

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT vs. GUJARAT FLLURO CHEMICALS LTD

C.A. No.-003507-003507 - 2014Supreme Court18 Sept 2013
Section 214

TDS paid exceeds the assessed tax?" 2. In the aforesaid order of reference, this Court has briefly noticed the facts and the Page 4 JUDGMENT 4 discussion in Sandvik case (supra) wherein, the main issue for consideration and determination by this Court was, whether the assessee is entitled to be compensated by the Revenue for delay in payment