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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Section 195(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,115Mumbai1,064Bangalore632Chennai489Kolkata175Karnataka132Ahmedabad127Jaipur69Hyderabad61Pune60Chandigarh53Visakhapatnam33Rajkot30Indore19Raipur18Lucknow17Cochin17Dehradun16Surat7Telangana7Allahabad6Nagpur6SC5Panaji5Agra4Jabalpur4Amritsar4Calcutta3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana1Patna1Cuttack1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 26011Section 244A6Section 260A3Section 201(1)3Section 1953Section 403Deduction3Section 194C2Limitation/Time-bar2TDS

M/s Modi Builders AND Realtors (P) Ltd., vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income tax,

The appeals are disposed of

ITTA/167/2012HC Telangana21 May 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 244ASection 260A

3) of section 143 or section 144 or section 147 or section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was ITA Nos. 167/2012 & 168/2012 Page

M/S.P.SATYANARAYANA AND SONS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1[9], HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITTA/209/2008HC Telangana
2
08 Sept 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 260

TDS need be made as the provisions of Section 195(1) read with 15 9(1)(vi) and (vii) read with Article 12 of the DTAA between India and Canada are not applicable? FACTS IN BRIEF 3

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV vs. M/S. PRABHATH AGRI BIO TECH P. LTD.,

The appeals stand dismissed

ITTA/325/2012HC Telangana19 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 17(2)Section 260A

TDS provisions relate to and prescribe one of the modes of collection of tax. It is with this objective that duties or “obligations” are imposed on the payer. This does not override or disturb the primary “obligation” imposed by the charging section read with the computation provisions. Further, we are specifically concerned with Section

The Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. Mesmer Technologies Ltd

The appeals are allowed in part

ITTA/673/2016HC Telangana15 Dec 2016

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,M.S.K.JAISWAL

Section 12ASection 194JSection 260Section 260A

3. Whether the Tribunal erred in law in not holding that the provisions of section 194J are not applicable to the facts and consequently there is no need to deduct any tax at source on the facts and circumstances of the case? 4. Without prejudice whether the Tribunal erred in law in not holding M/s KIADB being an entity registered

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, vs. M/s Trinity Advanced Software Labs Private Limited,

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

ITTA/421/2015HC Telangana01 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 195Section 260Section 40

3 for non-deduction of tax on payment made to abbey National Plc., UK., in not liable to TDS u/s.195 of the Act and consequently the said payments are not laible for disallowance u/s.40(a)(i) of the Act? b) Whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing relief to the assessee holding that the reimbursement of salary costs and other

M\S.CHENNAKESAVA VIJAYAWADA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIJAYAWAD

The Appeal is dismissed

ITTA/33/2000HC Telangana27 Aug 2012

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 194CSection 197(1)Section 201

TDS was deductible from the entire payment made to Messrs. Essar TAXAP/33/2000 6/27 JUDGMENT Projects Limited for the construction of refinery. When this issue travelled to the Tribunal, it concurred with the findings of the CIT [A] by discussing at length not only the order of CIT [A] but also independently examining the issue and in terms held that there

COMMR OF INCOME TAX-II, HYDERABAD vs. M/S JAPSON ESTATES PVT LTD., HYDERABAD

The appeal is allowed;

ITTA/84/2017HC Telangana23 Aug 2018

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 260Section 9(1)(vii)

195 of the Act, even though nothing has been made available to the Appellant from the consultant? 3) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not holding that the payment made to the person abroad are for independent business and in the absence of permanent establishment in India the same is not chargeable to tax in India and consequently