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.

16 results for “TDS”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad44Mumbai40Jaipur29Delhi27Bangalore25Chennai23Agra17Ahmedabad16Cuttack14Kolkata13Surat13Jodhpur11Lucknow9Raipur8Chandigarh7Pune7Amritsar7Visakhapatnam5Indore5Patna5Rajkot3Guwahati2Allahabad2Jabalpur1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 14819Section 6815Addition to Income14Cash Deposit11Demonetization10Section 69A9Section 2508Section 1478Section 133(6)6Section 143(3)

SHAH PATEL & COMPANY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2030/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalshah Patel & Company, Income Tax Officer, Vs. S.No.740/53, Under Sarangpur Ward-5(2)(4), Bridge, Opp. Anand Cloth Market, Ahmedabad. Sarangpur, Ahmedabad-380002. [Pan :Aagfs5763 E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S N Divatia With Shri Samir Vora, Ars Respondent By: Shri B P Makwana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia with Shri Samir Vora, ARsFor Respondent: Shri B P Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 68

demonetization period and made disallowance of Rs. 8,13,000/- being received on account of alleged SBN deposits from debtors and also disallowed the interest on TDS

6
Disallowance6
Section 115B5

DIPAK BALUBHAI PATEL - HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 942/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

TDS u/s. 194I of the Act which is clearly reflecting in Form 26AS records. The monthly rents were also deposited in bank accounts. Since the assessee is a Senior Citizen withdrawn and kept substantial balance in his bank accounts because of emergency medical needs. However after declaration of the demonetization

RAMESHKUMAR MELAPCHAND SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1665/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

demonetization period. In support, the assessee submitted substantial evidences of sales, purchases, stock and cash deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee also demonstrated the cash sales during the year under consideration was substantially lower, compared with the earlier years. The assessing Officer issued notices u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the suppliers of goods to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAMESHKUMAR MELAPCHAND SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1618/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

demonetization period. In support, the assessee submitted substantial evidences of sales, purchases, stock and cash deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee also demonstrated the cash sales during the year under consideration was substantially lower, compared with the earlier years. The assessing Officer issued notices u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the suppliers of goods to the assessee

REKHABEN INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 270/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)

demonetization period was an eye wash to create stock in the books of accounts and generate unaccounted cash in the books by recording cash sale against such purchases. Accordingly, the assessing officer held that the cash of Rs.28,67,50,000/- deposited I.T.A Nos. 270 & 287/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 8 Rekhaben INdravadan Chokshi vs. ITO in various bank accounts

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. REKHA INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 287/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)

demonetization period was an eye wash to create stock in the books of accounts and generate unaccounted cash in the books by recording cash sale against such purchases. Accordingly, the assessing officer held that the cash of Rs.28,67,50,000/- deposited I.T.A Nos. 270 & 287/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 8 Rekhaben INdravadan Chokshi vs. ITO in various bank accounts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1563/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

demonetization scheme has voluntarily declared the income of Rs.3 crores under IDS-2016. It is also pertinent to mention here that for declaration of any income under IDS, the source/nature of income was not required to be mentioned as the tax was charged at the fixed rate under the IDS. Therefore, it is immaterial that the assessee had mentioned “Other

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1451/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

demonetization scheme has voluntarily declared the income of Rs.3 crores under IDS-2016. It is also pertinent to mention here that for declaration of any income under IDS, the source/nature of income was not required to be mentioned as the tax was charged at the fixed rate under the IDS. Therefore, it is immaterial that the assessee had mentioned “Other

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1450/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

demonetization scheme has voluntarily declared the income of Rs.3 crores under IDS-2016. It is also pertinent to mention here that for declaration of any income under IDS, the source/nature of income was not required to be mentioned as the tax was charged at the fixed rate under the IDS. Therefore, it is immaterial that the assessee had mentioned “Other

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1562/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

demonetization scheme has voluntarily declared the income of Rs.3 crores under IDS-2016. It is also pertinent to mention here that for declaration of any income under IDS, the source/nature of income was not required to be mentioned as the tax was charged at the fixed rate under the IDS. Therefore, it is immaterial that the assessee had mentioned “Other

SAMIR NAVINCHANDRA SHAH,PALDI, AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, VEJALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

ITA 1461/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69A

demonetization being sourced from cash withdrawals made from bank. Firstly, not a single entry in the cash book has been found to be false or incorrect and the Books of accounts have not been rejected. The AO is only questioning the business wisdom of the assessee for withdrawing allegedly huge cash.The AO cannot sit in the armchair of a businessman

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJESHKUMAR RAMESHCHANDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1074/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &
Section 250Section 68

demonetization period to have decreased by 65.56%. The Ld. CIT(A) has noted that neither the Auditor has pointed out any discrepancy in the accounts of the assessee nor has the AO rejected the books of the assessee u/s.145(3) of the Act. He has noted the stock position depicted in the books of the assessee to have been accepted

AMBANI BUILDERS PRIVATE LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 304/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 68Section 69A

demonetization period, the assessee has failed to provide any details and also supporting documents. Thus, the AO found and held that the assessee has failed to produce any proof for the source of funds that has been I.T.A No. 304/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No 8 Ambani Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT deposited in its bank accounts. No cash flow

ANKIT VIJAYKUMAR JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1565/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 271ASection 68

TDS deducted. The expenses being incurred in normal course of business ought not to be disallowed. The same ought to be deleted. It be deleted now. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE) grievously erred both in law and on facts in not reproducing and considering all previous submissions made to NFAC from time

HARISHKUMAR KHUSHALRAY BHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2) NOW WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2042/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Harishkumar Khushalray Bhatt Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) P/1, Chandragupta Apartment Vs. Ahmedabad. Nr. Gordhandas Patel Hospital Vastrapur Ahmedabad. Pan : Abspb 3786 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh L. Shah, Ar : Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh L. Shah, AR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69ASection 80G

demonetization period. In pursuance of the selection for scrutiny, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. However, despite multiple opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not file the complete set of details as requisitioned. In response to the show cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer, the assessee merely furnished

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1) AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN VEJALPUR AHMEDABAD vs. RAMANBHAI JAGABHAI BHARWAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1834/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri
Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 69A

demonetization period. On the basis of this information, the AO recorded that income to the extent of Rs. 6.80 crore had escaped assessment and issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act to reopen the case. The assessee submitted his reply on 06.05.2023 giving details of its case. Despite these submissions, the AO was of the view that that