Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

21 results for “TDS”+ Section 28clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,745 Delhi2,711 Bangalore1,325 Chennai890 Kolkata580 Hyderabad396 Ahmedabad353 Jaipur223 Chandigarh219 Pune214 Indore214 Karnataka201 Raipur198 Patna196 Cochin181 Nagpur84 Surat84 Visakhapatnam81 Rajkot81 Lucknow76 Cuttack56 Amritsar53 Ranchi44 Dehradun41 Guwahati33 Agra25 Jodhpur22 Allahabad21 Telangana20 Panaji13 SC12 Kerala11 Calcutta10 Jabalpur9 Varanasi7 Rajasthan3 Uttarakhand2 Orissa2 Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 26318 Section 253(3)15 Section 143(3)13 Section 153A12 Section 194C12 Addition to Income12 Section 13210 Undisclosed Income10 TDS8 Disallowance

M/S RITHWIK RK JOINT VENTURE vs. PR. CIT, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 99/ALLD/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad26 Jul 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Pawan Chakrapani, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT DR

section 40(a)(ia) or deduction of TDS. 28. Ground no. 8 does not emanate from the impugned order of the Pr. CIT hence

M/S. RITHWIK RK JOINT VENTURE,HYDERABAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 107/ALLD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

5

26 Jul 2022

AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Pawan Chakrapani, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT DR

Section 263

section 40(a)(ia) or deduction of TDS. 28. Ground no. 8 does not emanate from the impugned order of the Pr. CIT hence

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 154/ALLD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 40

section 40(a) (ia) as invoked is not correct as the said provision is not applicable at all hence the action of two lower authorities are incorrect. 3. That in any view of the matter the nature of expenditure is marketing expenses incurred by the assessee company is towards reimbursement of payment made by distributors appointed by the company hence

KESARWANI MARKETING(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 373/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 40

section 40(a) (ia) as invoked is not correct as the said provision is not applicable at all hence the action of two lower authorities are incorrect. 3. That in any view of the matter the nature of expenditure is marketing expenses incurred by the assessee company is towards reimbursement of payment made by distributors appointed by the company hence

ITO(TDS),, ALLAHABAD vs. LOK SEWA AYOG,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 329/ALLD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad26 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Adv

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201

sections of the UPPSC. The then TDS AO, in his orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) for A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 dated 01.02.2016 considered the figures of the expenditure, under different heads in question , on the basis of the information furnished in the treasury , Allahabad . During the course of proceedings , the deductor had never raised any question as regards

SECRETARY, PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH,ALLAHABAD vs. IT OFFICER, T.D.S., ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 10/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad26 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Adv

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201

sections of the UPPSC. The then TDS AO, in his orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) for A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 dated 01.02.2016 considered the figures of the expenditure, under different heads in question , on the basis of the information furnished in the treasury , Allahabad . During the course of proceedings , the deductor had never raised any question as regards

SECRETARY, PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH,ALLAHABAD vs. IT OFFICER, T.D.S., ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 11/ALLD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Adv

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201

sections of the UPPSC. The then TDS AO, in his orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) for A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 dated 01.02.2016 considered the figures of the expenditure, under different heads in question , on the basis of the information furnished in the treasury , Allahabad . During the course of proceedings , the deductor had never raised any question as regards

ITO(TDS),, ALLAHABAD vs. LOK SEWA AYOG,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 330/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Adv

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201

sections of the UPPSC. The then TDS AO, in his orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) for A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 dated 01.02.2016 considered the figures of the expenditure, under different heads in question , on the basis of the information furnished in the treasury , Allahabad . During the course of proceedings , the deductor had never raised any question as regards

M/S MILLENIUM CONSULTANTS& SERVICE PROVIDERS,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 138/ALLD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 78/ALLD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

sections of the income tax act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ITA No.159/Alld./2013, 76/Alld./2013, 77/Alld/2013 & 78/Alld/2013 Assessment Year: 2005-06,2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. Kesarwani Marketing Private Limited,Allahabad U.P. v. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle, Allahabad ITA No. 159.Alld/2013-A.Y.: 2005-06 3. First , we shall take up appeal

M/S KESARWANI <ARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 159/ALLD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

sections of the income tax act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ITA No.159/Alld./2013, 76/Alld./2013, 77/Alld/2013 & 78/Alld/2013 Assessment Year: 2005-06,2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. Kesarwani Marketing Private Limited,Allahabad U.P. v. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle, Allahabad ITA No. 159.Alld/2013-A.Y.: 2005-06 3. First , we shall take up appeal

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 77/ALLD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

sections of the income tax act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ITA No.159/Alld./2013, 76/Alld./2013, 77/Alld/2013 & 78/Alld/2013 Assessment Year: 2005-06,2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. Kesarwani Marketing Private Limited,Allahabad U.P. v. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle, Allahabad ITA No. 159.Alld/2013-A.Y.: 2005-06 3. First , we shall take up appeal

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. C.IT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 76/ALLD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad01 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Shri UtkarshFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

sections of the income tax act is highly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ITA No.159/Alld./2013, 76/Alld./2013, 77/Alld/2013 & 78/Alld/2013 Assessment Year: 2005-06,2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 M/s. Kesarwani Marketing Private Limited,Allahabad U.P. v. JCIT (OSD), Central Circle, Allahabad ITA No. 159.Alld/2013-A.Y.: 2005-06 3. First , we shall take up appeal

SAVLA AGENCIES,ALLAHABAD vs. JCIT, RANGE-I, , ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 28/ALLD/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad06 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Savla Agencies, V. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, 26, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Range-I, Allahabad Allahabad-211001 Pan-Aawfs0816J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Tanmay Sadh, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.01.2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. Tanmay Sadh, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

28,364/- Cr b) Sangeeta Savla Rs. 34,92,002/- Cr c) Tarun Savla Rs. 15,54,351/- Cr d) Devaang Savla Rs. 2,87,073/- Cr Interest @ 12% on the above credit balances comes to Rs 2,07,404/-, Rs 4,19,040/ Rs 1,86,522/- & Rs 33,971/- respectively whereas you have credited above partners capital

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 20/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

28,383, while the correct figure is Rs. 52,56,92,612/- and prayers were made that correct figures should be considered , although the assessee did not revise Form No. 36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 19/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

28,383, while the correct figure is Rs. 52,56,92,612/- and prayers were made that correct figures should be considered , although the assessee did not revise Form No. 36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 21/ALLD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

28,383, while the correct figure is Rs. 52,56,92,612/- and prayers were made that correct figures should be considered , although the assessee did not revise Form No. 36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee

M/S BALAJI AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT. (0SD), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

ITA 152/ALLD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Namita S. Pandey, CIT-

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

Section 133A of the Act. The AO observed that the weight of items in quantity of purchases, consumption and closing stock shown in loose paper found in Annexure P-6 and weight in quantity shown in audit report are the same. The relevant impounded paper and audit report showing quantitative detail of raw material, consumption , purchases and stock were scanned

JCIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S BALAJI AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES, (P) LTD., ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

ITA 179/ALLD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Namita S. Pandey, CIT-

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

Section 133A of the Act. The AO observed that the weight of items in quantity of purchases, consumption and closing stock shown in loose paper found in Annexure P-6 and weight in quantity shown in audit report are the same. The relevant impounded paper and audit report showing quantitative detail of raw material, consumption , purchases and stock were scanned

M/S BALAJU AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee and Revenue for ay: 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purposes, while CO filed by assessee stand dismissed

ITA 632/ALLD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Namita S. Pandey, CIT-

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

Section 133A of the Act. The AO observed that the weight of items in quantity of purchases, consumption and closing stock shown in loose paper found in Annexure P-6 and weight in quantity shown in audit report are the same. The relevant impounded paper and audit report showing quantitative detail of raw material, consumption , purchases and stock were scanned