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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Section 145(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai316Delhi225Bangalore97Chandigarh89Hyderabad79Kolkata76Jaipur75Cochin65Chennai63Ahmedabad61Raipur38Ranchi33Visakhapatnam31Lucknow29Pune29Surat22Indore21Agra18Rajkot17Jodhpur14Nagpur11Patna8Amritsar7Allahabad6Dehradun5Guwahati5Varanasi5SC2Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 14416Addition to Income7TDS4Disallowance4Section 40A(3)3Section 2503Section 145(3)3Section 143(3)3Deduction3Section 194C

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

Section 40A(3)

145(3), and therefore, the disallowances u/s 40A(3) becomes redundant. Further, the disallowances u/s 40A(3) and section 69C for the same amount of expenditure is contradictory to itself as per the mandate. In the present case, the source of site expenses was never in dispute by the AO, as the same were incurred by the assessee as duly

SPARROW SECURITY SERVICES ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JAMMU

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

ITA 40/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

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

2
Section 194H2
Section 44A2
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 250oSection 36Section 43B

3. Natma Securities Ltd. v. ACIT, [2022] 145 taxmann.com 291 (Delhi - Trib.) Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Consequence of failure to deduct or pay (Illustrations) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Whether for purpose of levy of interest under section 201(1A) for late deposit of TDS

LADAKH ROADLINES,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 101/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 282

section 143(3) for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At the outset, we advert that both the appeals, have the same factual ground. With the consent of both the parties we take ITA No. 295/Asr/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 as lead case. 3. In ITA No. 295/Asr/2019 the assessee has raised the following grounds: “That the Learned Assessing Officer has without reason

MEASEG. LADAKH ROADLINES ,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 295/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 282

section 143(3) for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At the outset, we advert that both the appeals, have the same factual ground. With the consent of both the parties we take ITA No. 295/Asr/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 as lead case. 3. In ITA No. 295/Asr/2019 the assessee has raised the following grounds: “That the Learned Assessing Officer has without reason

THE TRANS ASIAN INDUSTRIES EXPOSITION PVT. LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE ASSESING OFFICER(TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue

ITA 753/ASR/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 194CSection 194H

145/-. The appellant on the other hand stated that the AO has not considered his submission and raised wrong demands as the said deduction was not required because the payments made were below ceiling limit prescribed u/s 194 J of the Act. However, the appellant has not provided any evidence in support of its claim, not even the copy

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), SRINAGAR vs. M/S TRANS ASIA INDUSTRIES EXPOSITION (P) LTD, SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue

ITA 751/ASR/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 194CSection 194H

145/-. The appellant on the other hand stated that the AO has not considered his submission and raised wrong demands as the said deduction was not required because the payments made were below ceiling limit prescribed u/s 194 J of the Act. However, the appellant has not provided any evidence in support of its claim, not even the copy

JAGTAR SINGH BRAR PROP. JAGTAR SINGH SADHU SINGH,BAGAPURANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, MOGA, MOGA

In the result, the penalty imposed u/s 271(1) (c) amounting to Rs

ITA 70/ASR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C.A
Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44A

TDS deducted accordingly), which resulted in an apparent non -disclosure of gross contract receipts to the tune of Rs.1.73 crores, as per the return filed. 4. The assessee explained the difference that the said transport bill amount of Rs.1.73 crores has been actually received on 17th April, 2015, and the same has also been considered in the gross receipts