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.

10 results for “TDS”+ Depreciationclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,136 Delhi1,055 Bangalore569 Chennai534 Kolkata181 Ahmedabad122 Hyderabad102 Chandigarh78 Pune58 Jaipur50 Raipur44 Visakhapatnam42 Ranchi37 Lucknow33 Indore21 Cuttack19 Rajkot19 Karnataka18 Guwahati18 Cochin17 Surat15 Patna10 Amritsar10 Nagpur10 Dehradun6 Kerala5 Jodhpur5 Varanasi4 Rajasthan4 Jabalpur4 Allahabad4 Telangana3 Agra3 SC2 Calcutta2 Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14844 Section 35A20 Section 139(1)12 Section 143(3)9 Disallowance7 Addition to Income7 Section 148(1)6 Deduction5 Section 404 Section 43D

SMT. BHARTI SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 221/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

depreciation, TDS etc. The issue is squarely covered by the coordinate bench decision in the case of “Gaurav Joshi versus

SMT. BHARTI SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

3

Section 40A(3)3

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 226/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

depreciation, TDS etc. The issue is squarely covered by the coordinate bench decision in the case of “Gaurav Joshi versus

SMT. BHARTI SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 222/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

depreciation, TDS etc. The issue is squarely covered by the coordinate bench decision in the case of “Gaurav Joshi versus

SHRI NAVAL KISHORE SINGH,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground of appeal No

ITA 376/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, C. A

Section 144Section 250Section 44A

depreciation ) 59,50,876.00 TDS ( balance Receivable ) 9,38,891.00 Bills Receivable 34,60,505.00 4,15,21,613.00 Less

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE OM SONS MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDKOT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 407/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

TDS Rs. 2,38,149/- Disallowance of depreciation claimed on trucks in excess of 15% Rs. 5,28,924/- Assessed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

In the result, the ground no

ITA 542/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenaandsh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 43D

depreciation of the capital expenditure should be allowed to the assessee in applicable rate. In relation to payment of the two Co- owners amount Rs.3,78,750/- the said addition is also deleted as each Co-owner is Rs. @ 12,500/- which is below the quantum of TDS

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR vs. M/S SURJIT SINGH AND CO, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 16/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

depreciation @ 9% of turnover declared by the assessee in the return of income; without appreciating the facts that the assessee did not produce documentary evidences in support of genuineness of claim of site charges/labour charges. 2. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not appreciating the fact

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 104/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

TDS accordingly as per the provisions of section 1941 of the Act. The nature of income for a same amount in question cannot be treated differently by the deductor and the deductee. This goes to prove that the treatment of rental income as business income is again not correct. 4 In view of the above facts, the rental income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

TDS accordingly as per the provisions of section 1941 of the Act. The nature of income for a same amount in question cannot be treated differently by the deductor and the deductee. This goes to prove that the treatment of rental income as business income is again not correct. 4 In view of the above facts, the rental income

SH. GURJINDER SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT DR

Section 194CSection 263

TDS and for this reason tax was not deducted at source. Complete detail of freight payment in the two units is enclosed for your ready reference. The Explanation 2 to Section 263 reads as under:- “For the purpose of section 263 of Income Tax Act an order passed by the AO shall be deemed to be erroneous