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.

5 results for “TDS”+ Section 96clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,187Mumbai1,141Bangalore522Chennai336Kolkata290Ahmedabad242Hyderabad232Indore185Chandigarh164Jaipur137Cochin134Karnataka128Pune99Cuttack68Visakhapatnam62Raipur54Nagpur39Surat39Rajkot36Lucknow26Agra19Ranchi16Jodhpur14Guwahati12Telangana11Dehradun10Patna9Amritsar9Panaji6Allahabad5Jabalpur3Calcutta2SC2Kerala2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 253(3)15Section 143(3)8Section 1543Condonation of Delay3Rectification u/s 1543Section 145(3)2Depreciation2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

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)

96,760/-. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed by I.T.O.-II(3), Allahabad making total additions of Rs. 2,42,39,843/- on adhoc basis and without allowing any set-off of brought forward business, losses and unabsorbed depreciation, thereby raising demand of Rs. 11,18,900/- vide his assessment order dated 27.03.2015. A.Ys

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)

96,760/-. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed by I.T.O.-II(3), Allahabad making total additions of Rs. 2,42,39,843/- on adhoc basis and without allowing any set-off of brought forward business, losses and unabsorbed depreciation, thereby raising demand of Rs. 11,18,900/- vide his assessment order dated 27.03.2015. A.Ys

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)

96,760/-. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed by I.T.O.-II(3), Allahabad making total additions of Rs. 2,42,39,843/- on adhoc basis and without allowing any set-off of brought forward business, losses and unabsorbed depreciation, thereby raising demand of Rs. 11,18,900/- vide his assessment order dated 27.03.2015. A.Ys

KESARWANI & CO.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 393/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad29 Nov 2024AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. Neel Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

96,49,454/-, there could be no justification to allege suppression of sales of only Rs.87,94,292/-. Therefore, the addition was required to be deleted. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee had raised questions on the source of figures of sales and purchases recorded by the ld. AO while preparing the trading account

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S KESARWANI & CO., ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 429/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad29 Nov 2024AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. Neel Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

96,49,454/-, there could be no justification to allege suppression of sales of only Rs.87,94,292/-. Therefore, the addition was required to be deleted. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee had raised questions on the source of figures of sales and purchases recorded by the ld. AO while preparing the trading account