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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 220(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi579Patna469Mumbai378Bangalore145Pune116Hyderabad95Karnataka91Chennai87Cochin82Visakhapatnam64Ahmedabad60Jaipur59Kolkata54Indore46Raipur35Lucknow34Chandigarh33Nagpur19Cuttack12Rajkot12Jodhpur10Dehradun9Kerala8Agra6Amritsar5Surat5Ranchi4SC2Panaji2Varanasi2Telangana1Rajasthan1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 220(2)12Section 234E12Section 200A12Section 1548Section 2504Section 2004TDS4Rectification u/s 1544Cash Deposit2Deduction

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

6. Appellant assessee has preferred these second appeals on the common ground that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of late filing fee imposed by the assessing officer (CPC), ignoring the fact that the belatedly filed TDS returns were processed and accepted by the CPC without prior deposit of said late filing fee and without affording reasonable

2
Reassessment2
Disallowance2

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

6. Appellant assessee has preferred these second appeals on the common ground that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of late filing fee imposed by the assessing officer (CPC), ignoring the fact that the belatedly filed TDS returns were processed and accepted by the CPC without prior deposit of said late filing fee and without affording reasonable

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

6. Appellant assessee has preferred these second appeals on the common ground that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of late filing fee imposed by the assessing officer (CPC), ignoring the fact that the belatedly filed TDS returns were processed and accepted by the CPC without prior deposit of said late filing fee and without affording reasonable

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

6. Appellant assessee has preferred these second appeals on the common ground that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of late filing fee imposed by the assessing officer (CPC), ignoring the fact that the belatedly filed TDS returns were processed and accepted by the CPC without prior deposit of said late filing fee and without affording reasonable

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD 3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 16/AGR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

sections 147/143(3) of the Act. 10. The ld. DR has objected to the admission of the sale deed, as according to him, the sale deed dated is 29.12.2007 and it ought to have been filed before the AO, which was not done. 6 &ITA No. 146/Agra/2017 11. Having considered the matter in the light of the rival contentions

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 146/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

sections 147/143(3) of the Act. 10. The ld. DR has objected to the admission of the sale deed, as according to him, the sale deed dated is 29.12.2007 and it ought to have been filed before the AO, which was not done. 6 &ITA No. 146/Agra/2017 11. Having considered the matter in the light of the rival contentions