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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 54F(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi33Bangalore21Mumbai21Chennai13Jaipur11Cochin10Lucknow8Hyderabad7Indore7Visakhapatnam6Kolkata6Ahmedabad6Patna3Guwahati2Karnataka2Raipur2Surat2Jabalpur1Nagpur1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 54F22Section 143(3)9Section 2638Addition to Income4Deduction4House Property3Exemption3Section 542Long Term Capital Gains2Capital Gains

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 41(1)Section 54F

54F of the Act. Hence, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 16. The next issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT(A) erred deleting the addition of Rs. 37,10,739/-in part made by the estimation of profit from work contract instead

PADMINI SOLANKI, DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. ADITYA HARSHVADAN MANGALDAS, TATVA GARDAN, CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI

2
TDS2
Business Income2

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 299/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

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

Section 143(3)Section 54F

TDS of Rs.4,42,500/- and Rs.4,00,000/- in AY 2021-22 & AY 2022-23 on the advances. 5.1.9 Thus in view of the above the addition of Rs.17,74,75,000/- by denying deduction U/s 54F is deleted.” 9. The Revenue has been unable to controvert the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). As already discussed earlier

MOHAN RAMCHANDANI,BANGLORE vs. ACIT-INTL TAX-2 AHEMDABAD, AHMEDABAD GUJARAT

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

ITA 1944/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Mohan Ramchandani Acit-Intl Tax-2 Flat-11001 Boddaballapur Road Vs. Ahmedabad. Presting Monte Carlo Yelahanka Satelite Town So Bangalore North. Pan : Adgpr 0211 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Saurabh Gupta, Ar Assessee By : Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54ESection 54FSection 54F(4)

4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Ahemdabad-13 has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in equating the claim of Deduction u/s 54F to TDS deductible u/s 194IA in as much as there is no pre-condition in Section

JAYVANTKUMAR RAMANLAL CHOKSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 917/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 14(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54Section 54ASection 54F

TDS. The assessee deposited complete proceeds into capital gains account with Bank of Baroda on 31.03.2018 and since the assessee fulfilled the conditions for claiming deduction under Section 54F of the Act, the assessee’s claim was acceptable and deduction under Section 54 of the Act was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The PCIT observed that the assessee had furnished

SHRI NANDKISHORE S. SODHAN(HUF),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 994/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 994/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Nandkishore S. Shodhan Ito, Ward-5(2)(3) (Huf) Vs Ahmedabad. D/11-12, Silver Arc Kavi Nanalal Marg Ellisbridge Pan : Aadhs 4064 F

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

section 263 was issued upon the assessee for the following reasons: “It can be seen from the records that during the year under consideration, the Assessee had received interest of Rs.2,65,247/- from Dutta Developers Pvt. Ltd. on which IDS of Rs.26,525/- had also been deducted and credited in the Govt. account. However, in the return of income

RAMNIKLAL R BHADRA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 67/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 54F

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 5. Ld. Senior Counsel Shri Tushar Hemani appearing for the assessee at the outset submitted that assessee’s son Shri. Ilesh (i.e co-owner of property