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.

183 results for “TDS”+ Section 77clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,285Mumbai1,212Bangalore721Chennai355Kolkata284Hyderabad228Ahmedabad183Indore182Cochin165Jaipur133Chandigarh123Karnataka121Raipur83Pune65Cuttack44Surat42Visakhapatnam33Rajkot27Jodhpur26Lucknow23Nagpur22Guwahati21Agra20Ranchi20Amritsar18Kerala17Telangana14Allahabad13Dehradun13Panaji12Jabalpur7Patna6SC4Varanasi4Calcutta2Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 80I91Addition to Income75Section 143(3)67Disallowance66Section 143(2)50Section 14A41Deduction36Section 4029TDS29Section 147

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)

77,689/- being interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. After considering the payment already made by the assessee, a demand of Rs.9,72,910/- was raised for the said year. In the said order, the AO also initiated penalty proceedings both under section 271C of the Act for not paying TDS

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

Showing 1–20 of 183 · Page 1 of 10

...
25
Section 14823
Section 143(1)20

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)

77,689/- being interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. After considering the payment already made by the assessee, a demand of Rs.9,72,910/- was raised for the said year. In the said order, the AO also initiated penalty proceedings both under section 271C of the Act for not paying TDS

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)

77,689/- being interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. After considering the payment already made by the assessee, a demand of Rs.9,72,910/- was raised for the said year. In the said order, the AO also initiated penalty proceedings both under section 271C of the Act for not paying TDS

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)

77,689/- being interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. After considering the payment already made by the assessee, a demand of Rs.9,72,910/- was raised for the said year. In the said order, the AO also initiated penalty proceedings both under section 271C of the Act for not paying TDS

SHREE HARI ENTERPRISE ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nfollowing terms:\n\ni) Issue No

ITA 822/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194JSection 263

section 194-I was deducted only on payment of Rs.6,00,000/-.\n\n9. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated the issue to have been adjudicated during the assessment proceedings. In this regard, he drew our attention to the reply filed to the ld.Pr.CIT placed before us\n\nat PB Page No.598 and 599, the contents of which are reproduced

THE DCIT,TDS CIRCLE,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2216/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2216/Ahd/2013 2007-08 Dcit Nirma Limited Tds Circle, Nirma House, Ashram Ahmedabad Road, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan No. Aaacn5350K Revenue By : Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. Dr. Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. With Shri Himanshu Shah, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2021 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue For A.Y. 2007-08 Which Is Arising From The Order Of The Cit(A)-Xxi, Ahmedabad Dated 13.06.2013, In The Proceedings Under Section 201(1)/201(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y. 2007-08 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. with Shri Himanshu Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 193Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

section 201(1) of the Act. 6. Both the learned DR and the AR before us vehemently supported the order of the authorities below as favourable to them. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has restored the appeal for fresh adjudication with

HUBTOWN BUS TERMINAL (AHMEDABAD) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE(TDS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 732/AHD/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 194Section 201

section 201(1A). The total demand raised was ₹3,45,28,003/-, comprising TDS of ₹1,41,50,821/- and interest of ₹2,03,77

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1550/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv
Section 250(6)Section 80I

section 195 was required to be deducted if the income in hands of the alleged agents was taxable within India. The ld.CIT(A) has examined the issue elaborately and recorded the finding that these agents have no permanent establishment in India. They are not operating from India and alleged commission income received by them is not taxable in India. Thus

M/S. GANESH ENTERPRISE.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2308/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2308/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 M/S Ganesh Enterprise, Addl.C.I.T., 205, Shubh House, Vs. Tds, 77, Swastik Soc. Opp. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Jimit Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 133ASection 194ASection 201(1)Section 271C

TDS, 77, Swastik Soc. Opp. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. PAN: AAKFG8477D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jimit Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03/06/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/06/2021 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance

THE DY.CIT (INT.-TAXA.)-1, , AHMEDABAD vs. ZYDUS LIFSCIENCE LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 36/AHD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. D.R
Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

TDS provisions under section 195 of the Act. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT Vs. Nokia Networks OY reported in 358 ITR 77

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 38/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

77,80,391/-. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued the draft assessment order dated 24.09.2021 under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Act, computing the total income at Rs.216,01,40,460/- and book profits under section 115JB at Rs.396,95,81,602/-. The assessee raised objections before the Hon’ble DRP, which issued directions under section 144C

G. B. BUILDERS, ,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT-CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 626/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Due Date On 24-11-2014, But Inadvertently Committed An Error Therein Of Depositing This Tds Using Pan Of The Seller Instead Of Pan Of The Appellant (As The Buyer)

For Appellant: Shri Hirak Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 194Section 194ISection 200Section 200ASection 234E

77,500/- by a registered sale deed on 25-11-2014. The assessee deducted tax u/s. 194-IA of the Act @ 1% amounting to Rs. 2,23,775/- and deposited the same with the Government before due date on 24-11-2014. However, at the time of filing TDS challan cum statement (form 26QB), the assessee inadvertently mentioned Mrs. Jhaveri

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Urvashi Shodhan, and Shri Parin Shah,For Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT.DR
Section 14A

section 43D is a beneficial provision but the provision iS very clear when it states that " {a} in the case of a scheduled bank the income by way of interest in relation to such categories of bad and^dou^btful debts as may be prescribed having regard to the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India in relation

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1517/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

77 taxmann.com 149. Moreover from reading of the above decision, it can be seen that the favorable judgements were neither cited or distinguished. In the above circumstances the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT -Vs- Vegetable Products Ltd. reported in 88 ITR 192 held that 'If Court I.T.A No. 1517 & 1621/Ahd/2019 A.Y.. 2008-09 Page

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1621/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

77 taxmann.com 149. Moreover from reading of the above decision, it can be seen that the favorable judgements were neither cited or distinguished. In the above circumstances the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT -Vs- Vegetable Products Ltd. reported in 88 ITR 192 held that 'If Court I.T.A No. 1517 & 1621/Ahd/2019 A.Y.. 2008-09 Page

ARVIND FASHIONS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 913/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act on the payments on which TDS was not deducted by the assessee is concerned, it is required to be noted that in the year under consideration, no TDS was deducted as the same was contingent liability and the bills were not issued which were issued subsequently and on that the TDS

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 939/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

77,31,294/- under section 35(2AB) on account of expenditure incurred with respect to research and development activity. However, no amount of research and development expenditure was allocated to the Dehradun unit while computing deduction under section 80IC of the Act. On question, the assessee submitted that research and development expenditures were neither attributable to Thol unit

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

77,31,294/- under section 35(2AB) on account of expenditure incurred with respect to research and development activity. However, no amount of research and development expenditure was allocated to the Dehradun unit while computing deduction under section 80IC of the Act. On question, the assessee submitted that research and development expenditures were neither attributable to Thol unit

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254

section 80-IA of the Act. 69. The learned CIT (A) disregarded the contention of the assessee by observing that the impugned income does not have nexus with the distribution of power activity of the assessee. Thus the learned CIT (A) upheld the finding of the AO. 70. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1842/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst. Commissioner Of M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax, Corporate House, S.G. Highway, Central Circle 2(3), Nr. Sola Bridge, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380 054 [Pan : Aaaci 5120 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit (Dr) Respondent Represented By: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble:-

Section 250

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds:- “1) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the upward adjustment