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.

45 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai676Delhi607Kolkata415Bangalore283Chennai184Ahmedabad146Jaipur114Hyderabad89Cochin75Chandigarh61Pune58Indore55Karnataka50Raipur49Cuttack48Visakhapatnam45Rajkot42Nagpur40Amritsar29Jodhpur24Surat22Panaji18Patna18Lucknow16Jabalpur16Allahabad15Guwahati14Ranchi11Agra8Kerala8Telangana6SC5Calcutta4Dehradun3Varanasi3Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 4057Section 194C46Section 143(3)36Section 14828Section 26326Deduction26TDS25Disallowance21Addition to Income20Section 133A

RP TRANSPORTERS, ,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 99/VIZ/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. SubrahmanyamFor Respondent: Shri M.N. Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 2Section 263Section 40

TDS on such payments, since assessee was in receipt of details about PAN of transporters at time of payment of freights and, thus, complied with provisions of section 194C(6

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

17
Section 194J14
Section 36(1)(v)14

THE ASST. CIT,, GUNTUR vs. M/S. BEST INDIA YOBACCO SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD,, GUNTUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 238/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Aug 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.238/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Acit Vs. M/S Best India Tobacco Circle-1(1) Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Guntur D.No.9-11-1, Kothapet Guntur [Pan :Aaacb9184B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co.No.59/Viz/2017 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.238/Viz/2017) (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) M/S Best India Tobacco Acit Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1(1) D.No.9-11-1, Kothapet Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaacb9184B]

For Respondent: Shri V.Appala Raju, DR
Section 194Section 194C(6)Section 40

TDS is required to be deducted on the payments made to the contractor u/s 194C of the Act. Section 194C (6

DY CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. CONZUG LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITA 507/VIZ/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Apr 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasa Rao, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 194CSection 263Section 40

section 194C of the Act, in explanation (iv)(c), work shall include carriage of goods or passengers or any mode of transport, other than by Railways. Since the CONCOR is a subsidiary organization of the Indian Railways and the Railways have carried the goods, there is no case for TDS u/s 194C of the Act. He relied on the order

GHANSHYAM SHARMA,,RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 461/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वषा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. The Principal Commissioner Jakhal Vill & Post Of Income Tax-1 Jhunjhunu District Visakhapatnam Rajasthan – 333 305 [Pan :Abups5701R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R.Venkat Raman, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2018

For Appellant: Shri R.Venkat Raman, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194Section 194CSection 194C(3)(i)Section 263Section 3Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In this case, the Pr.CIT has invoked the section 263 of I.T.Act and taken up the case for revision u/s 263 for the AO’s failure to examine the 5 Ghanshyam Sharma, Rajasthan deductibility of tax u/s 194C in respect of payments made to a single

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1) (TDS), VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LTD., TIRUPATHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 452/VIZ/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.452-454/Viz/2010 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Southern Power Circle-3(1) (Tds) Distribution Company Of Vijayawada A.P.Limited Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Kesavavayana Gunta Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1217/H/2010,517/Viz/2019 &518/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) M/S Southern Power Distribution Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Company Of A.P.Limited Income Tax Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Circle-3(1) (Tds) Kesavavayana Gunta Vijayawada Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri C.P.Rama Swami, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.10.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.P.Rama Swami, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201(1)

6. The AO also examined the definition of royalty contained in Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income tax Act and held that the transmission charges and SLDC charges paid by the assessee for the use of transmission network owned by AP Transco fall within the definition of royalty. Thus, held that the provisions of section 194J

THE ITO (TDS), RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/S. OM SAI RAM, ENTERPRISES,, MANDAPETA

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 152/VIZ/2016[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Mar 2019AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Income Tax Officer (Tds) Vs. M/S Om Sai Ram Enterprises Tds Ward-1 Ravulapalem Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaao2649G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.70/Viz/2018 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S Om Sai Ram Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds) Ravulapalem Tds Ward-1 Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaao2649G] रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2019 20.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 194C(1)Section 201(1)Section 271C

section 194C(1)(3) of the Act. After reducing the material supply from the payments made the TDS liability has worked out to Rs.Nil and the assessee did not make the TDS. The AO treated the material supply also as contract works and accordingly treated the assessee as the assessee in default for the payments made to the contractor

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 201/VIZ/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In this case, the CIT(C), Vijayawada has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A to the 40(a)(ia). While giving effect

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 205/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In this case, the CIT(C), Vijayawada has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A to the 40(a)(ia). While giving effect

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 206/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In this case, the CIT(C), Vijayawada has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A to the 40(a)(ia). While giving effect

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 202/VIZ/2017[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In this case, the CIT(C), Vijayawada has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A to the 40(a)(ia). While giving effect

ARUNACHALAM MANICKAVE,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT (A),-3,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 203/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 May 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In this case, the CIT(C), Vijayawada has taken up the case for revision u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A to the 40(a)(ia). While giving effect

M/S THE BHEEMUNIPATNAM MUTUALLY AIDED COOPERATIVE BUILDING SOCIETY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD-6(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 92/VIZ/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.92/Viz/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-14) M/S. The Bheemunipatnam Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), Mutually Aided Cooperative Ward-6(1), Building Society Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaaat 5114 H (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Y.A. Rao प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Karthik Manickam, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Y.A. RaoFor Respondent: Sri Karthik Manickam, Sr. AR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 194J(1)(a)Section 195ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 206A

6. The CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the action of the AO in determining the interest leviable U/s. 201(1A) for a period of 3 months for delay in remittance of TDS, while the delay is only….days. 7. The appellant submits that CIT (A) has erred in concluding that the provisions of section 206AA override the other

TULASI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6/VIZ/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.167/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.55/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Circle-2(1) D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Guntur 4/5, Arundelpet Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A.No.139/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.06/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Income Tax 4/5, Arundelpet Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19 .07.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The revenue’s case is that the assessee had entered into works contract with the organizers, hence TDS required to be made u/s 194C of the Act. The AO is also of the view that it is a composite supply contract, but not purchase and sale

TULASI SEEDS PVT.,LTD.,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 139/VIZ/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.167/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.55/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Circle-2(1) D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Guntur 4/5, Arundelpet Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A.No.139/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.06/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Income Tax 4/5, Arundelpet Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19 .07.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The revenue’s case is that the assessee had entered into works contract with the organizers, hence TDS required to be made u/s 194C of the Act. The AO is also of the view that it is a composite supply contract, but not purchase and sale

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. TULASI SEEDS PVT,. LTD.,, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 55/VIZ/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.167/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.55/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Circle-2(1) D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Guntur 4/5, Arundelpet Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A.No.139/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.06/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Income Tax 4/5, Arundelpet Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19 .07.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The revenue’s case is that the assessee had entered into works contract with the organizers, hence TDS required to be made u/s 194C of the Act. The AO is also of the view that it is a composite supply contract, but not purchase and sale

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. M/S TULASI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 167/VIZ/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.167/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.55/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Circle-2(1) D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Guntur 4/5, Arundelpet Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A.No.139/Viz/2015 & I.T.A.No.06/Viz/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Tulasi Seeds Private Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.6-4-6, Tulasi House Income Tax 4/5, Arundelpet Circle-2(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan :Aaact8054C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19 .07.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The revenue’s case is that the assessee had entered into works contract with the organizers, hence TDS required to be made u/s 194C of the Act. The AO is also of the view that it is a composite supply contract, but not purchase and sale

EISWAR EAXPORTS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-6,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 462/VIZ/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. Eswar Exports, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-6, D.No. 23-14-13, Chinnamvari Visakhapatnam. Street, Visakhapatnam. Tan No. Vpne00441A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Samuel Nagadesi – CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal – Sr.DR
Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 271C

194C & 194H during (M/s. Eswar Exports) the F.Y. 2012-13, but not remitted the same into the Government account within the stipulated due date, the quantum of such non-remitted TDS was found to be Rs. 6,99,878/-. Hence, the Addl.CIT(TDS) issued a show-cause notice to the assessee- deductor for levy of penalty u/sec. 271C. In response

THE ITO(TDS) WARD-3(3), GUNTUR vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RURAL WATER SUPPLY PROJECT,,

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 511/VIZ/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.511/Viz/2013 & 512/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Income Tax Officer (Tds) Vs. Executive Engineer Ward-3(3) Rural Water Supply Project Guntur Viswanadhapuram Podili, Prakasam Dist. [Pan : Hydro2981G] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.132 & 133/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.511 & 512/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13) Executive Engineer Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds) Rural Water Supply Project Ward-3(3) Viswanadhapuram Guntur Podili, Prakasam Dist. [Pan : Hydro2981G] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri MN Murthy Naik, CIT, DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS returns is a relevant point to be noted. Thus, taking totality of facts and circumstances into account and after reappraisal of the position in view of the submissions made and material filed, I am of the considered opinion that there is no liability under section 201(1) and 201(1A) for both the assessment years under consideration and accordingly

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. M/S. VEERA ASSOCIATES,, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 332/VIZ/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Feb 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deba Kumar SonowalFor Respondent: Shri S. Rama Rao, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40Section 40a

TDS on which the provisions of section 194C of the Act attracts.. Hence, requested to uphold the order of the assessing officer. With regard to the other proposition submitted by the assessee stating that the respondent has admitted the income in its hands, hence, the assessee should not be treated as assessee in default. The Ld. D.R. submitted that

SUBBA RAO JALADI,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

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

ITA 371/VIZ/2024[2013-14 ]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 194CSection 250Section 250(6)

TDS Return - Payment to Contractor (Section 194C) Valued at Rs. 5,03,950/- 3. Assessing Officer observed that as per the information available in this office, the assessee has made huge cash deposits to the tune of Rs. 9,52,90,900/- during the year under consideration. As the assessee has not filed his return of income for the year