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.

26 results for “TDS”+ Section 270Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi216Mumbai201Chandigarh64Bangalore62Pune38Jaipur28Ahmedabad26Hyderabad25Chennai19Kolkata15Lucknow11Nagpur10Visakhapatnam9Guwahati9Rajkot8Raipur8Indore5Patna4Surat2Jodhpur2Jabalpur2Dehradun1Amritsar1Cochin1Allahabad1SC1

Key Topics

Section 270A34Section 14818Section 145(3)18Addition to Income15Section 5714Section 143(3)13Section 14712Penalty12Disallowance11Section 40

ITO, WARD-1, PALANPUR, PALANPUR vs. GELOT AGRI EXPORTS, PALANPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 225/AHD/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(8)Section 40

TDS, and therefore, applying provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% of the said amount of Rs.15.09 crores,i.e Rs.4,52,85,292/-, was added to the income of the assessee. The AO initiated penalty proceedings for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting ,under section 270A

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

10
TDS10
Section 2509

GELOT AGRI EXPORTS,DEESA vs. ITO WD 1 PALANPUR, BANASKANTHA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(8)Section 40

TDS, and therefore, applying provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% of the said amount of Rs.15.09 crores,i.e Rs.4,52,85,292/-, was added to the income of the assessee. The AO initiated penalty proceedings for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting ,under section 270A

INFOANALYTICA CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the penalty u/s

ITA 1592/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)Section 40

section 270A (9) of the Act viz. (a) misrepresentation of suppression of facts and (c) claim of expenditure not substantiated by any evidence. Further, we observe that the AO has disallowed the sum of Rs.68,277/- u/s.143(3) of the Act, on account of non-deduction of TDS

ISHIT KAMLESHBHAI SHETH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 753/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 270A(6)(a)

TDS, and the assessment was concluded\nwithout any addition or disallowance. The omission to file the return\nunder section 139(1), though not condonable, does not constitute\nunder-reporting or misreporting in the statutory sense. The Assessing\nOfficer, in the facts of this case, ought to have exercised his discretion\nunder section 270A

PARULBEN VIJAYKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 164/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(10)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

Section 270A Parulben Vijakumar Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3– of the Act for misreporting of income and levied penalty @ 200% of the tax payable on such under reported income. 5. In appeal before Ld. CIT(A), he dismissed the appeal of the assessee with following observations:- “6.1. Carefully considered the submission of the appellant in view

SURESH RAO,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1235/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 192Section 270ASection 270A(7)Section 270A(9)Section 9

Section 270A(7) of the Act and the remaining penalty levied kindly be deleted accordingly. 5. The Order passed by the learned CIT(A) is bad in law and contrary to the provisions of law and facts. It is submitted that the same be held so now. 6. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend

ALTERA DIGITAL HEALTH (INDIA) LLP (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ALLSCRIPTS (INDIA) LLP),VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, Ground Number 11 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 359/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 92C(1)

TDS credit of INR 63,086 I.T.A No. 359/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2018-19 5 M/s. Altera Digital Health (India) LLP (Formerly known as Allscripts (India) LLP) vs. DCIT 14. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in incorrectly computing the deemed total income under section 115JC

LYSA TRADING LLP,AHMEDABAD,GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 208/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2022-23 Lysa Trading Llp Ito, Ward-1(2)(3) Corporate House-2, Shilp Vs Ahmedabad. Corporate Park Rajpath Rangoli Road Bodakdev Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaifl 3030 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 270A

section 270A of the Act. It be so held now. 3. As is evident from the perusal of the grounds raised before us, the solitary issue in the present appeal relates to treating an amount of Rs.17,08,908/-as assessee’s income from house property as opposed to the assessee’s contention that they were merely recovery of common

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,NETHERLANDS vs. THE ASSTT.CIT., CIRCLE(INTNL.TAXN.)-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result,\nwe hold that the above services did not qualify as FTS under the\nIndia-Netherlands Tax Treaty, since the “make available” clause\nhas not been satisfied in the instant facts

ITA 1027/AHD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Apr 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143Section 153

TDS to the extent of INR 12,344 ignoring the\nprovisions of Section 199 of the Act read with Rule 37BA of the Income-tax Rules,\n1962.\n19. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in circumstances of the case on the\nfacts and in law in increasing the tax payable amount by considering

MUKESH CHHOTELAL GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 797/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Shri Mukesh Chhotelal Gupta The Dcit, Cir.(1)(1) Gupta Nivas Vs. Ahmedabad. Chandkheda Sabarmati Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Ablpg 9729 N (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ar : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(1)Section 194ASection 57

TDS had been effected; and that no proximate connection between the interest receipts and the interest payments had been demonstrated. 2.6 Proceeding on the above and noting that none of the interest payments were made during the year and were stated to have been made in subsequent years, the AO held that the assessee failed to satisfy the statutory requirement

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground No. 10 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 688/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR
Section 153

TDS) as INR 28,28,09,236 instead of INR 27,73,19,576. 22. The learned AO has erred on the facts and in circumstances of the cane on the facts and in law in increasing the tax payable amount by considering INR 10,27,665 as refund already issued when no such refund has been issued

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MAHADEV SHIPBREAKERS PVT LTD., BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 724/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Assistant Commissioner Mahadev Shipbreakers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Of Income Tax, Office No. 213/216, 2Nd Floor, Circle-1, Samved Complex, Opp. Jail Bhavnagar Road, Bhavnagar-364001 [Pan :Aaecm 8398 J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Abhijit, Sr. Dr Respondent By: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &
Section 115BSection 148Section 148ASection 250Section 270A(9)Section 69A

TDS, supported by ledgers, bank statements, and confirmation from group concern M/s Shiv Corporation. Despite no incriminating evidence found, the Assessing Officer reopened the case, ignored submissions and video conference requests, and made an addition of Rs.80.94 lakhs under Section 69A, taxing it under Section 115BBE and raising a demand of Rs.1.13 crores. The Assessing Officer also wrongly initiated penalty

AMBIS TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2129/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Ambis Technologies P Ltd The Ito, C/O.Divyang J. Shah Vs Ward-1(1)(1) 201, 2Nd Floor, Devashish Complex Ahmedabad. Nr.Regenta Central Antarim Hotel Off Cg Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aalca 0742 K (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By : Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 270A

270A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the said assessment, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), vide order dated 28.11.2024, invoked the provisions of the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 and set aside the assessment order, restoring the matter to the file

BHIKHABHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1,, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2597/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir VoraFor Respondent: Shri Rajkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 57

Section 270A of the Act on the addition made to the income of the assessee in the quantum proceedings. 2. Issues involved in both the appeals being interrelated they were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 3. At the outset itself, Ld.Counsel for the assessee stated that

BHIKHABHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2596/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir VoraFor Respondent: Shri Rajkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 57

Section 270A of the Act on the addition made to the income of the assessee in the quantum proceedings. 2. Issues involved in both the appeals being interrelated they were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 3. At the outset itself, Ld.Counsel for the assessee stated that

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three\nby the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 275/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

270A of the\nAct.\n9. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or\nchange all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the\nhearing of the appeal.\n8.\nThough the assessee had taken other grounds of appeal\nalso, however, the sole and common issue raised by both the\nparties

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 255/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv., and Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR, and Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

TDS where applicable, and that the quantitative tally of consumption and closing stock was fully maintained and verified by statutory auditors. The assessee also submitted comparative GP/NP ratios for past years and argued that the GP rate of 12.5% applied by the AO was wholly arbitrary and unsupported by historical data.\n12. We note that the CIT(A) while giving

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three\nby the assessee, stand dismissed

ITA 274/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

TDS where\napplicable, and that the quantitative tally of consumption and\nclosing stock was fully maintained and verified by statutory\nauditors. The assessee also submitted comparative GP/NP ratios\nfor past years and argued that the GP rate of 12.5% applied by\nthe AO was wholly arbitrary and unsupported by historical data.\n12. We note that the CIT(A) while giving

JITENDRA PRAKASHCHANDRA SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1083/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshtriya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

270A(9) of the Act are also initiated herewith for misreporting the income 10. In view of the above, the total income of the assessee for the AY 2018-19 is hereby assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(38) of the I. T. Act, 1961, as below: Total income Income as per ROI Rs. 43,79,040/- Add: Disallowance

INEOS STYROLUTION INDIA LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ADDIT.CIT , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 58/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

TDS has been deducted on the income earned by the AEs on account of GHO and RHO services and requisite compliances have been done by the AEs in India. 12. That the AO / TPO / DRP has erred in law and on facts in ignoring Rule of consistency in view of the fact that no adjustment was made by the Learned