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 244A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai269Delhi157Bangalore86Kolkata51Chennai23Karnataka22Ahmedabad14Hyderabad10Chandigarh10Pune7Jaipur6Dehradun5Cochin4Lucknow4SC3Himachal Pradesh2Amritsar1Ranchi1Cuttack1Telangana1

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

2) SCC 508. According to him, since Section 244(A) is wider than the pre-existing Section 241, it is clear that all the judgments which deal with Section 241 apply with all force to the facts of this case. He also relied upon the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Vs. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala

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