Section 206C of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.394

Section 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 394 (Collection of tax at source) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 394 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 206C is Kourani v. Union OF India (83 Taxmann.com 137), cited in 1,708 of the 269 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 206C

Kourani v. Union OF India
83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court
1,708
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

2.8 In Conceria International (P.) Ltd. v. ITO
157 Taxmann.com 335 · 2023 · High Court
31
citing judgments

The levy of fees under section 234E for delayed filing of quarterly TDS returns is confirmed as per the binding precedent of Conceria International (P.) Ltd. The court also considered that Section 200A(1)(c) was not introduced during the Assessment Years 2012-13.

Anglo French Textile Company Ltd. v. CIT
23 ITR 101 · 1953 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

Profits attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India can be conservatively estimated, such as by applying a percentage of global profits to Indian sales, when the PE's activities in India are minimal.

CIT v. Adisankara Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd.
362 ITR 233 · 2014 · High Court
14
citing judgments

A technical breach of filing a statutory form, such as Form 27C, can be condoned. No liability under section 206C(6A) or 206C(7) can be fastened on the assessee if the statutory form is filed, even if not furnished in time.

Chandmal Sancheti v. ITO
72 Taxmann.com 237 · 2016 · ITAT
13
citing judgments

An assessee should be granted the benefit of a declaration filed at the appellate stage, even if delayed, as appeals are a continuation of assessment proceedings. The delay in filing declarations under section 206C(1A) should not be a ground to deny the benefit to the assessee.

Lampmaster Wolters India P. Ltd. v. ITO
141 Taxmann.com 149 · 2022 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can be levied for belated TDS returns filed, and processed, on or after June 1, 2015, in line with amendments to section 200A.

383 (Mad.), Nila Bakers and Confectionaries (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO
139 Taxmann.com 535 · 2022 · High Court
11
citing judgments

The levy of late fees under Section 234E of the Income-tax Act is illegal for TDS returns concerning periods prior to June 1, 2015. This is because Section 234E does not apply to assessment years before this date.

G.K. Traders v. ITO
143 Taxmann.com 425 · 2022 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

Delay in filing a buyer's declaration under Section 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, does not empower the Assessing Officer to deny the benefit of the declaration to the assessee.

Eurotech Maritime Academy (P.) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer (TDS)
137 Taxmann.com 63 · 2022 · High Court
7
citing judgments
CIT (TDS) v. Priya Blue Industries (P.) Ltd.
65 Taxmann.com 206 · 2016 · High Court
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 206C

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi vs. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Ranchi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 197/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.193 To 197/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2013-2014 To 2017-2018) Vs Jharkhand Acit, Ranchi State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Nepal House Area, Ranchi Jharkhand-834002 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcj 2578 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, All Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018, Respectively. 2. An Adjournment Has Been Sought On Behalf Of The Assessee By Shri Aloke Kumar Choudhuri, Gm(Finance) Of The Assessee Corporation Stating That Due To Unforeseen Circumstances, They Have Been Unable To Engage Alternative Representation & Prepare The Case For The Hearing Within The Scheduled Timeframe. The Reasons Given Being Unsatisfactory, The Adjournment Application Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit-Dr Has Also Sought Adjournment Stating That The Order Has Been Passed By Him As Cit(A) & His Stands Be Precluded From Defending The Said Order As He Has Given Relief To The Assessee & It 2

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: None (Adjournment Petition filed)
Section 206CSection 260

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi vs. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Ranchi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 196/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.193 To 197/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2013-2014 To 2017-2018) Vs Jharkhand Acit, Ranchi State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Nepal House Area, Ranchi Jharkhand-834002 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcj 2578 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, All Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018, Respectively. 2. An Adjournment Has Been Sought On Behalf Of The Assessee By Shri Aloke Kumar Choudhuri, Gm(Finance) Of The Assessee Corporation Stating That Due To Unforeseen Circumstances, They Have Been Unable To Engage Alternative Representation & Prepare The Case For The Hearing Within The Scheduled Timeframe. The Reasons Given Being Unsatisfactory, The Adjournment Application Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit-Dr Has Also Sought Adjournment Stating That The Order Has Been Passed By Him As Cit(A) & His Stands Be Precluded From Defending The Said Order As He Has Given Relief To The Assessee & It 2

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: None (Adjournment Petition filed)
Section 206CSection 260

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi vs. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Ranchi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 195/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.193 To 197/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2013-2014 To 2017-2018) Vs Jharkhand Acit, Ranchi State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Nepal House Area, Ranchi Jharkhand-834002 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcj 2578 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, All Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018, Respectively. 2. An Adjournment Has Been Sought On Behalf Of The Assessee By Shri Aloke Kumar Choudhuri, Gm(Finance) Of The Assessee Corporation Stating That Due To Unforeseen Circumstances, They Have Been Unable To Engage Alternative Representation & Prepare The Case For The Hearing Within The Scheduled Timeframe. The Reasons Given Being Unsatisfactory, The Adjournment Application Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit-Dr Has Also Sought Adjournment Stating That The Order Has Been Passed By Him As Cit(A) & His Stands Be Precluded From Defending The Said Order As He Has Given Relief To The Assessee & It 2

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: None (Adjournment Petition filed)
Section 206CSection 260

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi vs. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Ranchi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 194/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.193 To 197/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2013-2014 To 2017-2018) Vs Jharkhand Acit, Ranchi State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Nepal House Area, Ranchi Jharkhand-834002 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcj 2578 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, All Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018, Respectively. 2. An Adjournment Has Been Sought On Behalf Of The Assessee By Shri Aloke Kumar Choudhuri, Gm(Finance) Of The Assessee Corporation Stating That Due To Unforeseen Circumstances, They Have Been Unable To Engage Alternative Representation & Prepare The Case For The Hearing Within The Scheduled Timeframe. The Reasons Given Being Unsatisfactory, The Adjournment Application Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit-Dr Has Also Sought Adjournment Stating That The Order Has Been Passed By Him As Cit(A) & His Stands Be Precluded From Defending The Said Order As He Has Given Relief To The Assessee & It 2

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: None (Adjournment Petition filed)
Section 206CSection 260

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi vs. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Ranchi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 193/RAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.193 To 197/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2013-2014 To 2017-2018) Vs Jharkhand Acit, Ranchi State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Nepal House Area, Ranchi Jharkhand-834002 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcj 2578 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Patna-3, All Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017- 2018, Respectively. 2. An Adjournment Has Been Sought On Behalf Of The Assessee By Shri Aloke Kumar Choudhuri, Gm(Finance) Of The Assessee Corporation Stating That Due To Unforeseen Circumstances, They Have Been Unable To Engage Alternative Representation & Prepare The Case For The Hearing Within The Scheduled Timeframe. The Reasons Given Being Unsatisfactory, The Adjournment Application Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit-Dr Has Also Sought Adjournment Stating That The Order Has Been Passed By Him As Cit(A) & His Stands Be Precluded From Defending The Said Order As He Has Given Relief To The Assessee & It 2

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition filed)For Respondent: None (Adjournment Petition filed)
Section 206CSection 260