Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

17 results for “TDS”+ Section 194C(7)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai648 Delhi579 Kolkata376 Bangalore284 Chennai173 Ahmedabad127 Jaipur89 Hyderabad79 Cochin67 Indore53 Karnataka48 Raipur45 Rajkot39 Nagpur31 Cuttack26 Pune24 Amritsar24 Chandigarh23 Surat19 Patna19 Jodhpur18 Visakhapatnam17 Panaji16 Allahabad14 Lucknow12 Guwahati12 Jabalpur11 Ranchi9 Kerala8 SC5 Calcutta4 Telangana4 Agra3 Dehradun3 Varanasi3 Rajasthan2 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 Gauhati1 Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 4024 Section 143(3)15 Addition to Income14 Section 194C11 Disallowance11 Section 194I10 Section 143(2)9 Section 2639 TDS9 Section 44A

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

section 194C(7) of the Act and thus committed default of non-deduction of TDS in the case of transporters

8

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

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 provisions of the Act including provisions of section 195A of the Act. 8. The CIT(A) ought to have allowed the claim of appellant that provisions of section 194C

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

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PVT. LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Apr 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Fenil A Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

194C of the Act @ 2%. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Ld. AO has rightly considered the agreement and concluded that it is in the nature of engineering services which attracts the provisions of section 194J of the Act and the tax needs to be deducted @ 10%. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Ld. AO has rightly disallowed

KOYYA GANGA VENKATA SATYA BHASKAR RAO,EAST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFICER, WARD-1, TUNI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 146/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.145/Viz/2023 & 146/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Koyya Ganga Venkata Satya Vs. Income Tax Officer Bhaskar Rao Ward-1 A.V.Nagaram Tuni East Godavari Dist. [Pan : Bespk1580A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 44A

section 44AE has admitted income of Rs.90,000/- against the receipt of Rs.4,96,177/-. Moreover, the assessee had also deducted TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Therefore, pleaded that considering the same, the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the erroneous order passed by the Ld.AO and allow the appeal of the assessee. 7

KOYYA GANGA VENKATA SATYA BHASKAR RAO,EAST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFICER, WARD-1, TUNI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 145/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.145/Viz/2023 & 146/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Koyya Ganga Venkata Satya Vs. Income Tax Officer Bhaskar Rao Ward-1 A.V.Nagaram Tuni East Godavari Dist. [Pan : Bespk1580A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 44A

section 44AE has admitted income of Rs.90,000/- against the receipt of Rs.4,96,177/-. Moreover, the assessee had also deducted TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Therefore, pleaded that considering the same, the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the erroneous order passed by the Ld.AO and allow the appeal of the assessee. 7

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

TUMMIDI BROTHERS JEWELLERY, ,RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 179/VIZ/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S Tummidi Brothers Jewellery Vs. Income Tax Officer Shop No.196, Mgwcc Ward-3 Thadithota Rajamahendravaram Rajamahendravarm [Pan :Aafft5256N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Rama Krishna, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri D.S.Sunder Singh: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Vijayawada In Appeal No.10149/Cit(A)/Vja/2019-20 Dated 30.07.2020 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11. 2. Ground No.1 & 6 Are General In Nature Which Does Not Require Separate Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Rama Krishna, DR

Section 194CSection 40

TDS u/s 194C of the Act. However, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance for want of evidences such as work bills, confirmations from the individual goldsmiths etc. Goldsmiths are moving labour force, works with head goldsmiths and does the work wherever the work is available, thus it is ambitious to expect the work bills, confirmations from the goldsmiths for their

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 198/VIZ/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

7. Vide ground no.3, the assessee contends that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.16 Crs. According to the Assessing Officer, it is a prior period expenditure which cannot be claimed as deduction in the year under consideration. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, was that the liabilities created were based on estimated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 202/VIZ/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

7. Vide ground no.3, the assessee contends that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.16 Crs. According to the Assessing Officer, it is a prior period expenditure which cannot be claimed as deduction in the year under consideration. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, was that the liabilities created were based on estimated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 200/VIZ/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

7. Vide ground no.3, the assessee contends that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.16 Crs. According to the Assessing Officer, it is a prior period expenditure which cannot be claimed as deduction in the year under consideration. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, was that the liabilities created were based on estimated

HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 203/VIZ/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

7. Vide ground no.3, the assessee contends that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.16 Crs. According to the Assessing Officer, it is a prior period expenditure which cannot be claimed as deduction in the year under consideration. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, was that the liabilities created were based on estimated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 199/VIZ/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.202, 198, 199, 188, 200/Viz/2022 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Hindustan Shipyard Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aach 4275 P (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

7. Vide ground no.3, the assessee contends that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.16 Crs. According to the Assessing Officer, it is a prior period expenditure which cannot be claimed as deduction in the year under consideration. The case of the assessee, on the other hand, was that the liabilities created were based on estimated

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ANDHRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 50/VIZ/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-2017) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 194CSection 2(15)

TDS u/s 194C for whole amount of Rs.1,00,90,251/-. Since, there was a difference in gross receipts and the admitted receipts the AO made the addition of Rs.12,52,61,694/- on account of short admission of receipts from BCCI. The AO has assessed the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.26,71,55,964/- as under : Excess

CHERUKURI RAGHU KIRAN,CHIMAKURTHY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , GUNTUR

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

ITA 445/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.445/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) Sri Cherukuri Raghu Kiran Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.7-320, Main Road Income Tax Chimakurthy Circle-2(1) Prakasam Dist. Guntur [Pan :Aczpk6211E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Rama Krishna, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Rama Krishna, DR

Section 172Section 194CSection 40

7-320, Main Road Income Tax Chimakurthy Circle-2(1) Prakasam Dist. Guntur [PAN :ACZPK6211E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, AR प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Shri B.Rama Krishna, DR सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date of Hearing : 04.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri

KOLLI VENKATA MOHANA RAO, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 352/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, Sr.DR

Section 194CSection 234BSection 234DSection 40

194C of the IT Act. The AR stated that these persons, in turn, made payments to labourers engaged by them and thus TDS is not required to be made. However, the AR did not produce any material in support of his arguments. As these six persons are not employees of the assessee and the total sums paid to them exceeded

MARTURI SRINIVASA RAO,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.124/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Marturi Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.1-75, 2Nd Line Ward-1(1) Rajeev Nagar Colony Guntur Atchampet Post, Guntur [Pan : Bvnpm4138E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

section 273, no penalty shall be imposable on the person or the assessee, as the case may be, for any failure referred to in the said provisions if he proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. 7 I.T.A. No.124/Viz/2023, A.Y.2017-18 Marturi Srinivasa Rao, Guntur On similar set of facts, the decision was taken in favour