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.

36 results for “TDS”+ Section 119clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi553Mumbai525Bangalore269Karnataka123Chennai119Chandigarh114Kolkata94Cochin63Jaipur57Raipur54Hyderabad52Pune43Indore39Ahmedabad36Surat31Cuttack30Nagpur19Visakhapatnam15Rajkot11Lucknow10Telangana10Ranchi9Patna8Agra7Guwahati7SC4Dehradun4Allahabad4Jodhpur2Punjab & Haryana1Calcutta1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 14A30Addition to Income26Section 26319Disallowance19Section 14818TDS16Section 143(1)14Depreciation13Section 8011Section 10(108)

JANKI WIND FARM DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1000/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

TDS credit but rejected the rectification for the double addition.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the mistake of double addition was apparent from the record and rectifiable under Section 154. Both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) erred in rejecting the rectification claim.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "154", "139(9)", "119

SHRI BALASHAH BAVA SANSTHA SARVAJANIK TRUST,ANAND vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 12A10
Section 15410
ITA 304/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G(5)

section 119. However and was noticed in the preceding parts of this decision, the same is confined to relaxation, incorporating a power to condone or to relieve a person from the rigours of the statute. That provision surely cannot be construed as contemplating the CBDT extinguishing a claim or a right. [Para 60]” 10. In the case of Sofitel Realty

SHRI BALASHAH BAVA SANSTHA SARVAJANIK TRUST,ANAND vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 303/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G(5)

section 119. However and was noticed in the preceding parts of this decision, the same is confined to relaxation, incorporating a power to condone or to relieve a person from the rigours of the statute. That provision surely cannot be construed as contemplating the CBDT extinguishing a claim or a right. [Para 60]” 10. In the case of Sofitel Realty

KAD STEEL ROLLING MILLS,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, TDS, ASHRAM ROAD,

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

ITA 652/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 201Section 201(1)

TDS and Rs. 40,866/- as interest. 4. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). During appellate proceedings, the Kad Steel Rolling Mills vs. ITO Asst. Year –2013-14 - 3– assessee admitted that the forms were indeed filed late but submitted that the delay was due to an inadvertent oversight

JAYESHKUMAR TULSIDAS SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2387/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Gohil, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Section 10(100)Section 10(108)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 251

119(2)(b) cannot adjudicate or grant exemption u/s 10(108). The impugned direction amounts to abdication of duty, rendering the order bad in law. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the appellant received compensation under the duly approved "BSNL VRS-2019" scheme, which fully satisfies the conditions prescribed under Rule 2BA and is eligible

JAYESHKUMAR TULSIDAS SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2388/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Gohil, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Section 10(100)Section 10(108)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 251

119(2)(b) cannot adjudicate or grant exemption u/s 10(108). The impugned direction amounts to abdication of duty, rendering the order bad in law. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the appellant received compensation under the duly approved "BSNL VRS-2019" scheme, which fully satisfies the conditions prescribed under Rule 2BA and is eligible

NAVIN KALIDAS PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 109/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 109/Ahd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Navin Kalidas Patel The Pr.Cit-3 802, Block –A, Status Ahmedabad Vs. Appartment, Opp. T. V. Tower, Drive-In-Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Achpp0215B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-3, (In Short ‘The Pr. Cit’) Dated 29.03.2021 In Exercise Of His Revisionary Power Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Return Of Income For A.Y. 2015-16 Was Filed By The Assessee On 25.01.2016 Showing Total Income Of Rs.2,03,730/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

section 119; or (d) the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is prejudicial to the assessee, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person. As per the Explanation 2, the order passed by the A.O. shall be deemed to be erroneous and pre-judicial

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

119. On 27.10.2016, opening stock was 19105.64 grams out which 912.52 grams was sold through invoice no 120 to 151. The appellant has further given the stock position on 26.10.2016 and 27.10.2016 as under:- Date Opening Stock (Grams) Sale (Grams) Closing Stock (Grams) 26.10.16 23963.360 4857.72 19105.64 27.10.16 19105.64 912.52 18193.12 5.3.7 The assessing officer has noted on page

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

119 (Mum-Trib). It is a decision rendered on 28.6.2019. Bench has reproduced the discussion made in the assessee’s own case for earlier years. It reads as under: “9. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The issue involved in the present appeal, i.e. whether freebies

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 939/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

119 (Mum-Trib). It is a decision rendered on 28.6.2019. Bench has reproduced the discussion made in the assessee’s own case for earlier years. It reads as under: “9. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The issue involved in the present appeal, i.e. whether freebies

SMT. PASHIBEN PRAJAPATI FAMILY TRUST (DISC),AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 305/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Has In-Turn Arisen From The Intimation Dated 07.12.2022 Issued By Cpc, Bengaluru, U/S.154(Cpc/2122/U5/ 314311772) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Rupesh R Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 164(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80C

TDS and my attention was drawn to Form No. 26AS which is placed in Paper Book at Pages 17 to 20. It was also submitted that the assessee filed ITR in Form No.5 which is placed at page no.21-23 of the paper book. It was submitted 10 I.T.A No.305/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 Page No. Smt, Pashiben Prajapati Familly Trust(Disc

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 14/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R
Section 14ASection 36Section 80

TDS needs to be given while giving effect to this order. 53.3 From the above direction, we note that the learned CIT-A has just instructed the AO to allow the claim of the assessee subject to the direction. As such, at the time of hearing the learned DR has not brought any infirmity in the direction given

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2047/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Dec 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R
Section 14ASection 36Section 80

TDS needs to be given while giving effect to this order. 53.3 From the above direction, we note that the learned CIT-A has just instructed the AO to allow the claim of the assessee subject to the direction. As such, at the time of hearing the learned DR has not brought any infirmity in the direction given

JERAMBHAI RATNABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1531/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Vijay H Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 199

Section 199 of the Act read with Rule 37BA of the Act. The same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act, determining total income at Rs. 5,40,311/- and refund due of Rs. 11,960/-. The Assessee once again filed revised Return of Income on 30.12.2022 without modifying total income and claiming refund amount

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1871/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1129/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(OSD),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 821/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1358/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2406/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2408/AHD/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS Range, 380009 Ahmedabad-380014 [PAN No.AAACC0134G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 07.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.10.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This bunch of appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are filed against