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.

61 results for “TDS”+ Section 249clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai304Delhi264Chennai124Bangalore105Karnataka89Cochin73Chandigarh72Raipur71Ahmedabad61Jaipur58Kolkata52Hyderabad49Surat46Pune32Indore28Visakhapatnam23Lucknow22Ranchi13Amritsar9Cuttack8Rajkot7Jodhpur4Varanasi4Agra4Nagpur3Guwahati3Telangana2Panaji2Dehradun1Patna1Kerala1

Key Topics

Disallowance31Addition to Income29Section 143(3)26TDS24Penalty24Section 271(1)(c)22Section 1021Section 14A18Deduction15Section 143(1)

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1816/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 249(4)

Section 249(4), if assessee failed to pay the taxes on the returned income, then its appeal cannot be entertained on merit; b. The appeals are time barred; c. Form No.35 has not been duly signed and verified. 2. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the taxes have been paid along with return in form of TDS

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Showing 1–20 of 61 · Page 1 of 4

14
Section 80I14
Section 14812
ITA 1817/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 249(4)

Section 249(4), if assessee failed to pay the taxes on the returned income, then its appeal cannot be entertained on merit; b. The appeals are time barred; c. Form No.35 has not been duly signed and verified. 2. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the taxes have been paid along with return in form of TDS

SHANKARBHAI VIRABHAI PATEL,DAHOD vs. ITO WARD-1, DAHOD

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

ITA 2218/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Parag Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 194CSection 44ASection 69ASection 80T

TDS had also been\ndeducted, the assessee failed to provide any supporting documentation such\nas work details, expenditure incurred, or material purchases to substantiate\nthe contract income received by him. Further, the Assessing Officer noted\nthat the assessee had invested a sum of ₹1.42 crore in two fixed deposits and\nreceived ₹17 lakh as maturity proceeds, yet the assessee provided

SHANKARBHAI VIRABHAI PATEL,DAHOD vs. ITO WARD-1, DAHOD

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

ITA 2219/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri Parag Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 194CSection 44ASection 69ASection 80T

TDS had also been\ndeducted, the assessee failed to provide any supporting documentation such\nas work details, expenditure incurred, or material purchases to substantiate\nthe contract income received by him. Further, the Assessing Officer noted\nthat the assessee had invested a sum of ₹1.42 crore in two fixed deposits and\nreceived ₹17 lakh as maturity proceeds, yet the assessee provided

DEEP MULTIPLEX PVT. LTD.,BARODA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) (1), BARODA

In the results, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1719/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.1719/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Deep Muliplex P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.1(1)(4) 9, Arunoday Society Baroda. Vs 2, Mangaljyot Apartment Alkapuri Baroda Pan : Aabck 4719 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/02/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

249/-. According to the AO since the lessees have deducted TDS under section 194I of the Act, the income it has earned

SALIM VALIMOHAMAND MEMAN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2326/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Varis V. Isani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 249(2)Section 253Section 3Section 5

TDS Circle Ahmedabad. 4, Sahajanad Society Vs Danilimda Ahmedabad. PAN : ACBPM 7325 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Varis V. Isani, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee

SUMAN NANDLAL RAVAL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 2389/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 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 10Section 10(108)Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

SUMAN NANDLAL RAVAL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 2390/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 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 10Section 10(108)Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NASCENT INFO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2828/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & M/S. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2828/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ Ito M/S. Nascent Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Ward-3(1)(1), Vs. A-805, Sapath-Iv, Opp. Ahmedabad Karnavati Club, Ahmedabad- 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aac Cn3 670 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Santosh Karnani, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By: Mehul K. Patel, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 13/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2019 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed - Am:

For Appellant: Santosh Karnani, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mehul K. Patel, AR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 44A

TDS cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 13. The Ld. CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the penalty by observing as under: “6. I have perused the arguments of both sides and case laws relied upon. The penal proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act would be decided based on following observations

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1864/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon’ble High Court as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, RANGE-4,, BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon’ble High Court as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court

STERLING ADDLIFE INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 229/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri A.C. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

TDS Circle Ahmedabad. Sterling Hospital Building Vs Off Gurukul Road, Memnagar Ahmedabad 380 052. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.C. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee

MANSHA TEXTILES PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1396/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13 Mansha Textiles P. Ltd. The Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) 1, Vikram Society Vadodara. Gotri Road, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 0191 J (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24

section 249(3) to admit a belated appeal upon sufficient cause. After an extensive survey of authorities, the CIT(A) held that the explanation of internal discord, without any legal restraint or credible corroboration, did not constitute “sufficient cause”. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee had not produced any injunction, resolution or directive that prevented timely filing, and that

LAXMANJI KHODAJI SOLANKI (THAKOR),GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1626/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 148Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 69

249(4)\nof the Act ignoring fact that appellant has no taxable income\nand accordingly not liable for filing return of income.\n\n6. Ld. NFAC failed to pass order as per the provision of section\n250(6) of the Act and appellant prays that same may be set\naside to the file of CIT (A) / NFAC for readjudication

JAYENDRA BIPINCHANDRA PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITOWARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 189/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Parin S Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 249(3)

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

JAYENDRA BIPINCHANDRA PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITOWARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 190/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Parin S Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 249(3)

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

CHHAGANLAL BHIMABHAI DANGODARA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 2547/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Dr. Kumarbhai R Pandya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(108)Section 250

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

CHHAGANLAL BHIMABHAI DANGODARA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 2548/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Dr. Kumarbhai R Pandya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(108)Section 250

249(3) of the Act, the appeal cannot be admitted. Since the appeal is not maintainable, there is no need to adjudicate on the merits therein. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld.CIT(A, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. We have gone through the records and considering the merits of the case, we condoned

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1261/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 249(4)Section 294(4)(a)

Section 249(4) (a) of the Act and, thus, dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A). Shivam Water Treaters Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2010-11 3. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal the Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the self-assessment tax has been paid. In this regard he drew out attention

ARROW DIGITAL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1568/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1568/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Arrow Digital Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, 1005-06, 10Th Floor, Vs. Cirle-1(1)(1) Aditya Complex, Ahmedabad. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-38006. Pan: Aaeca2215J

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

249. Considering the facts discussed' herein above, it is held that the claim made-by the assessee is not bona fide. The claim besides being incorrect in law is mala fide, and Explanation 1 to section 271(1}(o) would come into play and work to the disadvantage of the assessee. Even in the present case Appellant has failed