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.

48 results for “TDS”+ Section 10clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,758Mumbai4,527Bangalore2,376Chennai1,801Kolkata1,087Pune917Hyderabad653Ahmedabad615Jaipur430Raipur355Chandigarh300Indore236Nagpur226Cochin195Karnataka183Visakhapatnam172Lucknow146Surat138Rajkot132Jodhpur83Ranchi66Cuttack65Amritsar64Patna63Agra48Telangana46Dehradun44Panaji44Guwahati43Jabalpur28SC22Allahabad17Kerala15Calcutta13Varanasi8Himachal Pradesh8Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana4Orissa3J&K3Uttarakhand3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Bombay1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 14846Section 143(3)42Section 25031TDS26Section 15425Section 37(1)25Section 272A(2)(k)24Section 14722Addition to Income22Section 148A

THE REGIONAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA ,FARRUKHABAD vs. ITO (TDS) , ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 199/AGR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 250

TDS u/s. 201(1) and Rs.1,98,025/- as\ninterest on short deduction u/s. 201(1A) of the Act).\n3.\nAssessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who\nafter considering the submissions and contentions of the appellant,\napproved the action of learned Assessing Officer and dismissed assessee's\nappeal.\n4. Assessee has preferred this second appeal against the first

THE CHIEF MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION) STATE BANK OF INDIA,JHANSI vs. ADDITIONAL CIT(TDS), KANPUR

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

15
Natural Justice15
Bogus Purchases14

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 289/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 10(5)Section 201(1)Section 271C

TDS on Leave Fare Concession (LFC) to overseas destinations. The assessee claimed that the LFC was for domestic travel and the en-route foreign journey was incidental, hence exempt under section 10

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),AGRA, AGRA vs. EMCO EXPORTS, AGRA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 415/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 9

Sections of Chapter XVII. It is in this sense that we hold that the I.T. Act constitutes one single integral inseparable Code. Hence, the provisions relating to TDS applies only to those sums which are chargeable to tax under the I.T. Act. If the contention of the Department that any person making payment to a 10

GRAM VIKAS KALYAN SANSTHAN,MATHURA vs. I.T.O. (TDS), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 30/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhgram Vikas Kalyan Sansthan, Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), Nagla Aklha, Sonkh – Goverdhan Road, Agra. Mathura – 281 123 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aaatg3272E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shalenndra Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 Date Of Order : 28.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shalenndra Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

10. observe that the assessee has made several payments to the contractors and failed to deduct TDS on certain amounts. We are aware that TDS provisions have gone several changes over the years and several amendments were brought on record especially in section

RAKESH AGARWAL ,ALIGARH vs. PCIT AGRA-1, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 205/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263Section 50Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

TDS. The Assessee further requested for valuation of the property by Valuation Officer, contesting that the Circle Rate did not reflect the Fair Market Value (hereinafter referred to as ‘FMV’). Thereafter, a reference was made to the Technical Unit by the AO, vide the letter dated 17-03-2022, by NFAC, for assistance in valuation and the District Valuation Officer

MAMTA AGARWAL,ALIGARH vs. PCIT AGRA-1, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 204/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263Section 50Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

TDS. The Assessee further requested for valuation of the property by Valuation Officer, contesting that the Circle Rate did not reflect the Fair Market Value (hereinafter referred to as ‘FMV’). Thereafter, a reference was made to the Technical Unit by the AO, vide the letter dated 17-03-2022, by NFAC, for assistance in valuation and the District Valuation Officer

CIVIL SURGEON CUM HOSPITAL SUPERINTANDENT BHIND (M.P.),BHIND vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS OFFICE GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeals ITA Nos

ITA 594/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

TDS) and many others. 10. Ld. Sr. DR has supported the impugned order. 11. We notice that section 200A was amended

CIVIL SURGEON CUM HOSPITAL SUPERINTANDENT BHIND,BHIND vs. AESSESSING OFFICER TDS OFFICE, AAYAKAR BHAVWAN CITY CENTRE FLOOR FIRST

In the result, assessee’s appeals ITA Nos

ITA 589/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

TDS) and many others. 10. Ld. Sr. DR has supported the impugned order. 11. We notice that section 200A was amended

CIVIL SURGEON CUM HOSPITAL SUPERINTANDENT BHIND (M.P.),BHIND vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS OFFICE GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeals ITA Nos

ITA 595/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

TDS) and many others. 10. Ld. Sr. DR has supported the impugned order. 11. We notice that section 200A was amended

CIVIL SURGEON CUM HOSPITAL SUPERINTANDENT BHIND (M.P.),BHIND vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS OFFICE, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeals ITA Nos

ITA 596/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

TDS) and many others. 10. Ld. Sr. DR has supported the impugned order. 11. We notice that section 200A was amended

AL HAMD AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD,ALIGARH vs. DC/ACIT, ALIGARH

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 63/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 40

TDS to be deducted while making payment of FTS in terms of Section 40 (a) (i) of the Act. 57. A plain reading of Section 90 (2) of the Act, makes it clear that the provisions of the DTAA would prevail over the Act unless the Act is more beneficial to the Assessee. Therefore, except to the extent a provision

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M), MAHARAJPUR vs. ITO.,(TDS), GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 135/AGR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),MAHARAJPUR vs. JCIT., (TDS), BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 131/AGR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON EMGOMEER (E/M),AIR FIRCE STATION,MAHARAJPUR vs. JCIT.(TDS), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 129/AGR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON ENGINEER(E/M),MAHARAJPUR vs. ITO.,(TDS), , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 134/AGR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),GWALIOR vs. ITO.(TDS), GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 132/AGR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),GWALIOR vs. ITO,(TDS),, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 133/AGR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GARRISON EMGOMEER (E/M) AIR FORCE STATION , MAHARAJPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS),, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

ITA 128/AGR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 154Section 200(3)Section 250Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 274

section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. Income Tax Officer, (TDS) has levied a penalty of Rs. 10

GUMAN SINGH KUSHWAH,SHIVPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHOKNAGAR

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

ITA 544/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshgumnam Singh Kushwah, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Infront Of Collector Kothi, Ashok Nagar, Shiv Colony, Shivpuri, Mp Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bcjpk2729Q Assessee By : Shri Ashish Goyal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 206ASection 50C

10-12-2021 and 11-1-2022 to furnish the requisite reply. Since there was no response from the side of the assessee, the assessment was completed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act by the Learned AO. In the reassessment order, the Learned AO noted that assessee had purchased plot for Rs 71 lakhs during

VEENA SINGH,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 324/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 253(3)Section 68

TDS of Rs.2,34,213/-. However, as the original return was filed belatedly under Section 139(4), the Assessing Officer observed that the revised return so filed was not acceptable. Further notice under Section 142(1) with a detailed questionnaire dated 14.12.2017 issued by Assessing Officer, went unanswered. The Assessing Officer, based on discrepancies and lack of explanations, made