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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Section 292Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore28Delhi21Mumbai14Chennai8Nagpur6Jabalpur6Jaipur5Jodhpur5Pune5Raipur5Surat3Ahmedabad2Kolkata1Karnataka1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)2Section 292B2Section 143(2)2TDS2

PREMILABEN HASMUKHBHAI PATEL,UNJHA vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, WARD-1, PATAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 237/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarasstt.Year : 2022-23 Premilaben Hasmukhbhai Patel Dcit, Cpc Prp. Pramukh Enterprise Vs Bangalore At Present: 21, Ambica Society Ito, Ward-1, Patan. Opp: Umiya Mata Mandir Unjha 384 170 Pan : Cpdpp 4066 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri P.F. Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Ravindra, SR.DR
Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 199(1)Section 250Section 292B

section 292B providing that for any mistake, the return cannot be held to be invalid. 3. He has erred in law and on facts in upholding grant of TDS

THE ACIT, RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. CLP POWER INDIA PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1127/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Dave, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 292B

292B of the Act and quashed the reassessment as bad in law. (2) The ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that the assessee has not raised any objection during the course of re-assessment proceedings regarding validity of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. (3) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts