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.

22 results for “TDS”+ Section 272A(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi174Mumbai112Chennai88Bangalore68Visakhapatnam56Pune32Karnataka26Allahabad23Ahmedabad22Kolkata19Nagpur19Lucknow18Panaji15Indore13Cochin12Surat11Cuttack11Hyderabad7Jaipur6Rajkot4Chandigarh4Raipur4Patna3Jodhpur2Guwahati1Jabalpur1SC1Varanasi1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 271C60Section 272A(2)(g)42TDS20Section 14A18Addition to Income12Section 234E11Disallowance11Section 26(1)(iii)9Penalty9Depreciation

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2681/AHD/2017[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R आदेश आदेश PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER All four appeals relate to the same assessee and pertain to two different assessment years i.e. Asst.Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 with the issues involved relating to levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(g) and section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 201(1)8
Section 250(6)4

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2679/AHD/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R आदेश आदेश PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER All four appeals relate to the same assessee and pertain to two different assessment years i.e. Asst.Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 with the issues involved relating to levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(g) and section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2678/AHD/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R आदेश आदेश PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER All four appeals relate to the same assessee and pertain to two different assessment years i.e. Asst.Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 with the issues involved relating to levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(g) and section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2680/AHD/2017[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R आदेश आदेश PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER All four appeals relate to the same assessee and pertain to two different assessment years i.e. Asst.Year 2015-16 and 2016-17 with the issues involved relating to levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(g) and section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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

ITA 1785/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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

ITA 2578/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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

ITA 2652/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

TDS certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

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 certificate but not recorded in books of accounts and on account of bogus purchases, the Ld. A.R. submitted that difference in receipt to that of Form 26AS cannot be the reason for making the addition, the penalty was on the non- furnishing of particulars of income which is not just and proper. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that

BANK OF BARODA,ANAND vs. THE ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1608/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 220(2)Section 234E

272A became redundant and by adding a proviso to the said section, this effect was therefore limited upto 01.07.2012. 17. In essence, section 234E thus prescribed for the first time charging of a fee for every day of default in filing of statement under sub-section (3) of section 200 or any proviso to sub-section (3) of section 206C

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1817/AHD/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These four appeals have been filed by the assessee against four different orders dated 08.06.2018, 09.06.2018, 08.06.2018 & 09.06.2018 passed by the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad pertaining to A.Ys. 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2016-17 respectively. 2. The grounds raised are as under :- ITA No.1815/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2015-16 Your appellant

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1815/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These four appeals have been filed by the assessee against four different orders dated 08.06.2018, 09.06.2018, 08.06.2018 & 09.06.2018 passed by the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad pertaining to A.Ys. 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2016-17 respectively. 2. The grounds raised are as under :- ITA No.1815/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2015-16 Your appellant

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1818/AHD/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These four appeals have been filed by the assessee against four different orders dated 08.06.2018, 09.06.2018, 08.06.2018 & 09.06.2018 passed by the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad pertaining to A.Ys. 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2016-17 respectively. 2. The grounds raised are as under :- ITA No.1815/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2015-16 Your appellant

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1816/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : These four appeals have been filed by the assessee against four different orders dated 08.06.2018, 09.06.2018, 08.06.2018 & 09.06.2018 passed by the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad pertaining to A.Ys. 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2016-17 respectively. 2. The grounds raised are as under :- ITA No.1815/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2015-16 Your appellant

GANESH HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, TDS CIRCLE, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1196/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1196/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ganesh Housing Corporation Adcit(Tds Circle) बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Amrutjayanti Ltd., 100 Ft. Hebatpur, Vs. Bhavan, Navjivan Trust Thaltej Road, Nr. Sola Building, Off. Ashram Bridge, Off. S. G. Highway, Road, Ahmedabad- Ahmedabad-380054 380009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacg5590Q .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shah, ARsFor Respondent: 12/10/2021
Section 203Section 271A(2)(g)Section 272A(2)(g)Section 273B

D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH - AM: The appeal filed by the Assessee for A.Y. 2013-14, arise from order of the CIT(A) –8, Ahmedabad dated 31.05.2019, in proceedings under Section 272A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly

THE ITO, WARD-9(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE PARSHWANATH CORPORATION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1693/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.872/Ahd/2015 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1693/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11) 1. The Income Tax 1.Shree Parshwanath बनाम/ Corporation Officer, Ward-9(1) Vs. 50, 3Rd Floor Ahmedabad Harisiddh Chambers Ashram Road Ahmedabad-380 014 2. Shree Parshwanath 2. Income-Tax Officer Ward-9(1) Corporation, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfs 3093 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellants) (""यथ" / Respondents) Assessee By : Ms. Arti Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 131

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned cross-appeals have been filed by the Assessee and the Revenue against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–Ahmedabad-5, [CIT(A) in short] vide appeal no.CIT(A)- XV/ITO.9(1)/18/2013-14 and now CIT(A)-5/Wd.9(1)/121/2014-15 dated 02/03/2015 arising in the assessment order