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.

18 results for “TDS”+ Section 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi959Mumbai793Patna473Bangalore414Pune379Cochin340Chennai301Kolkata194Indore188Ahmedabad167Hyderabad152Karnataka120Chandigarh110Jaipur95Raipur84Visakhapatnam74Nagpur53Dehradun48Surat39Rajkot36Lucknow32Jabalpur28Jodhpur23Amritsar18Guwahati16Agra16Cuttack12Allahabad11Telangana10Panaji5SC4Varanasi4Calcutta3Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2Ranchi2J&K1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 234E59Section 200A55Section 14842Section 15434Section 139(1)12TDS12Section 194C8Section 148(1)6Section 2505Deduction

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 561/ASR/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Section 154(8) makes this further clear, i.e., that any order of amendment u/s. 154(1) r/w sec. 154(4) has to be a result of a conscious decision by the concerned authority to either amend or not to amend the order sought to be rectified. The time frame stipulated thereby is, even as clarified in SBI v. ITO (TDS

5
Disallowance5
Addition to Income5

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 284/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Section 154(8) makes this further clear, i.e., that any order of amendment u/s. 154(1) r/w sec. 154(4) has to be a result of a conscious decision by the concerned authority to either amend or not to amend the order sought to be rectified. The time frame stipulated thereby is, even as clarified in SBI v. ITO (TDS

FIRST INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 46/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar20 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.46/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154oSection 194CSection 250Section 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act amount to Rs. 10,07,395/- for payment of freight charges to related party without deduction of TDS and payment of interest amount to Rs. 47,509/- to TATA Capital Finance Ltd without deducting TDS. The notice U/s 154

B D S TECHOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 163/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

154 of the Act in charging fees payable under section 234E of the Act. The assessee has raised two facets of the issue; one against the order of CIT(A) in holding that such orders passed are not appealable and not maintainable under section 246A(1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 167/ASR/2021[2014-15 Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

154 of the Act in charging fees payable under section 234E of the Act. The assessee has raised two facets of the issue; one against the order of CIT(A) in holding that such orders passed are not appealable and not maintainable under section 246A(1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised

B D S TECHNOLOGIES ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 164/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q3]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

154 of the Act in charging fees payable under section 234E of the Act. The assessee has raised two facets of the issue; one against the order of CIT(A) in holding that such orders passed are not appealable and not maintainable under section 246A(1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 165/ASR/2021[2013-14 Q4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

154 of the Act in charging fees payable under section 234E of the Act. The assessee has raised two facets of the issue; one against the order of CIT(A) in holding that such orders passed are not appealable and not maintainable under section 246A(1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 166/ASR/2021[2014-15 Q1]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246A(1)

154 of the Act in charging fees payable under section 234E of the Act. The assessee has raised two facets of the issue; one against the order of CIT(A) in holding that such orders passed are not appealable and not maintainable under section 246A(1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised

SHRI HARINDER PAL SINGH,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 123/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 153ASection 154Section 205Section 250

154 of the assessee and denied the claim of TDS. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the observation of the ld. AO and rejected the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 3. During hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted the written submission

DHILLON AND SIMRAN LIVER FIBRO SCAN CENTRE,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS)-1, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 92/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2019-20

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

Section 154Section 194CSection 194JSection 234ESection 250

TDS return contemplated into levying of fee u/s 234E of the Act is subject matter of verification of facts from record which is not covered under the provisions of section 154

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 186/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mohit Kumar Nigam, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

TDS statement in Form-24Q for Q3 & Q4 were filed belatedly on 31.07.2014 and the same were processed electronically by AO, CPC on 16.12.2016 levying late filing fee as per provision of section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed rectification application u/s 154

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 185/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mohit Kumar Nigam, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

TDS statement in Form-24Q for Q3 & Q4 were filed belatedly on 31.07.2014 and the same were processed electronically by AO, CPC on 16.12.2016 levying late filing fee as per provision of section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed rectification application u/s 154

M/S. IQBAL MEMORIAL TRUST ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 68/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 12ASection 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)(a)Section 200A(1)(b)Section 234E

154 that is not empowered to determine the similarity of facts of the case which Sibia Health Care Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT(TDS), the judgment of ITAT, Amritsar Bench to grant waiver of late fee. Although, the late fee in filing of TDS prior to 01.06.2015 was illegal and hence it is liable to be deleted. The counsel contended

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

154/-. (iv) The records shows that the AO had issued a questionnaire dated 28.06.2016 to the assessee. In Question Number-13, he has asked for details of cash purchases and sales with complete addresses PAN,/Identity of the parties. In response, the assessee’s Authorized Representative has replied that “the assessee had not made any cash sale/purchase during the year

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 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

section 147 of the act. Since, no addition made on the ground of reasons recorded, hence, the additions would not sustain.In support, he placed reliance on the judgement of the coordinate Amritsar Bench in the case of Gaurav Joshi versus Income Tax Officer in ITA No.274 ASR 2018 order dated Jan.16, 2019; [2019] 174 DTR 0353(Asr)Trib) where

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

section 147 of the act. Since, no addition made on the ground of reasons recorded, hence, the additions would not sustain.In support, he placed reliance on the judgement of the coordinate Amritsar Bench in the case of Gaurav Joshi versus Income Tax Officer in ITA No.274 ASR 2018 order dated Jan.16, 2019; [2019] 174 DTR 0353(Asr)Trib) where

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

section 147 of the act. Since, no addition made on the ground of reasons recorded, hence, the additions would not sustain.In support, he placed reliance on the judgement of the coordinate Amritsar Bench in the case of Gaurav Joshi versus Income Tax Officer in ITA No.274 ASR 2018 order dated Jan.16, 2019; [2019] 174 DTR 0353(Asr)Trib) where

SHRI DARPAN JAIN,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX WARD - 1(1), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed

ITA 577/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 147Section 36Section 68

TDS provisions were not applicable. However, it is observed that interest figures in the P&L A/c and in the bank account do not match. Further, it is observed that as Darpan Jain Capital A/c in the books of Pushkar Udhyog the entry of receipt of Rs. 52,00,000/- is as under:- Debit Credit