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.

68 results for “TDS”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,819Mumbai1,528Chennai820Bangalore710Pune451Kolkata444Ahmedabad400Hyderabad302Raipur284Jaipur278Karnataka245Chandigarh202Cochin200Patna172Indore134Cuttack133Visakhapatnam116Lucknow107Surat103Amritsar68Rajkot61Nagpur60Agra47Jodhpur42Allahabad42Telangana33Guwahati30Panaji27Jabalpur21Dehradun20Varanasi13Calcutta13Kerala10SC6Ranchi5Rajasthan4Orissa4Punjab & Haryana1Uttarakhand1J&K1

Key Topics

Addition to Income45TDS42Section 14427Section 234E26Section 25026Natural Justice24Section 143(3)21Section 200A20Section 35A20Deduction

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,JK BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS vs. ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR, ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessees are allowed for

ITA 238/ASR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 250

TDS deduction as required by the appellate authority. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld. Addl. CIT to adjudicate the matter afresh in accordance with law. 9. The issue related to violation of principles of natural justice

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,JK BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS vs. ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR, SILK FACTORY ROAD SRINAGAR

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessees are allowed for

ITA 237/ASR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Showing 1–20 of 68 · Page 1 of 4

18
Section 200A(1)16
Section 250(6)15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 250

TDS deduction as required by the appellate authority. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld. Addl. CIT to adjudicate the matter afresh in accordance with law. 9. The issue related to violation of principles of natural justice

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF NCOME TAX CPC ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 134/ASR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order even dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner

EXEXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE ,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC ( TDS ), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 137/ASR/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order even dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 133/ASR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order even dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner

EXEXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE ,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), SRI NAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 136/ASR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order even dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 135/ASR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order even dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner

MESERS SPEED SURYA MOVIES ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 417/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40

TDS, without considering the missions of the assessee and without observing the principles of natural justice. 3. That in any case

MESERS MALWA MOTORS,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 131/ASR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 131/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice are flexible and cannot be put in any rigid formula; the purport of the notice being to allow the opportunity of being heard. Further still, even assuming so, a defect in the notice, it is even otherwise well-settled, only amounts to an irregularity, and is not a jurisdictional defect. As explained in Mithila Motors Pvt. Ltd. (supra

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 346/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

justice. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making an addition of Rs.15,40,998/- u/s 68 of the Act without considering the facets of Section 68 of the Act and without considering the facts that

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 347/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

justice. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making an addition of Rs.15,40,998/- u/s 68 of the Act without considering the facets of Section 68 of the Act and without considering the facts that

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 under the provisions of section 194(I) of the Act. 7.2 The Ld. DR in support of his contention referred to the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Shambhu investment private limited 263 ITR 143 (SC) and submitted that the primary object of the assessee while explaining the property

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 under the provisions of section 194(I) of the Act. 7.2 The Ld. DR in support of his contention referred to the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Shambhu investment private limited 263 ITR 143 (SC) and submitted that the primary object of the assessee while explaining the property

SH. SADA RAM CHAWLA,TARN TARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), TARNTARAN

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

ITA 479/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Nipun Khanna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40a

justice. 7. That the Appellant craves leave to add, amend or withdraw any new ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” 2. The first issue is regarding confirmation of addition of Rs. 10,32,932/- on account of deriving commission income without deducting TDS u/s.194H. 3. Briefly, the facts as per the records

SHRI SATISH KUMAR. S/O. SH. HANS RAJ ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 258/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A No.258/Asr/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2014-15 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Shri Satish Kumar S/O Hans Raj, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of B-12, Mch-366/13, Billa Income-Tax-1, Jalandhar House, New Jagatpura, Hoshiarpur Pan: Aawpk 0932 D अपीलाथ" Appellant अपीलाथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

natural justice or without application of mind . . .The phrase 'prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue' has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. For example, when

CHIEF MANGER, CANRA BANK ( PERSON RESPONSIBLE) ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS ) CIRCLE , JAMMU

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

ITA 187/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vinamar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

natural justice, we consider it deem fit to remand back the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh issue of TDS

EXECUTIVE OFFICER (DDO/PR) MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE,KASHMIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS) , SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita Nos.632 & 633(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Sh. Rahul Dhawan (Ld. DR)
Section 250(6)Section 253(1)

natural justice. We also feel it appropriate to direct the Assessee/Appellant to extend its full co-operation and participation in the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when required and in ITA Nos.632& 633/Asr/2017 5 (A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15) Executive Officer (DDO/PR) Municipal Committee, Kashmir vs. ITO, Ward (TDS

EXECUTIVE OFFICER (DDO/PR) MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE,KASHMIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS) , SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 633/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita Nos.632 & 633(Asr)/2017 Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Sh. Rahul Dhawan (Ld. DR)
Section 250(6)Section 253(1)

natural justice. We also feel it appropriate to direct the Assessee/Appellant to extend its full co-operation and participation in the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when required and in ITA Nos.632& 633/Asr/2017 5 (A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15) Executive Officer (DDO/PR) Municipal Committee, Kashmir vs. ITO, Ward (TDS

M/S. ORACLE CONSTRUCTIONS ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 244/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AR

natural justice, and therefore, he requested that the 3 Oracle Constructions v. ITO matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal along with the correct appeal memo filed in Form No. 35 by rectifying the mistake in financial year by as 2012-13. The counsel has contended that although the appellant

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR,GARHSHANKAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, HOSIARPUR

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

ITA 27/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 69A

natural justice, hence liable to be set aside.” 2. At the outset, the counsel requested vide application received on 24.04.2023 for condonation of delay duly supported with an affidavit attested by notary of Government of Punjab dated 10thApril 2023. The relevant para of the same reads as under: “(iii) Aggrieved, the assessee was advised to file first appeal. Since