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.

13 results for “TDS”+ Section 154(7)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi949Mumbai773Patna473Bangalore407Cochin315Pune283Chennai273Kolkata179Indore179Hyderabad119Karnataka118Ahmedabad114Chandigarh85Jaipur83Raipur82Nagpur52Visakhapatnam49Lucknow36Surat36Dehradun30Jabalpur28Rajkot28Agra14Amritsar13Telangana10Jodhpur10Guwahati8Allahabad5Panaji5Cuttack5SC4Varanasi4Himachal Pradesh2J&K1Kerala1Punjab & Haryana1Calcutta1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 200A45Section 234E44Section 14842Section 15419Section 139(1)12TDS9Section 194C8Section 148(1)6Section 246A(1)5Disallowance

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

TDS. The notice U/s 154 wasissued. None was present on behalf of the assessee. The exparte order was passed with addition of amount to Rs. 10,07,395/- &amount to Rs. 47,509/- which works out total amount to Rs. 10,54,904/- with the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before

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

5
Addition to Income5
Deduction3

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

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 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 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

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

7 to 9 and Form 16A Page S.No.10) . Sir, in view of filing of TDS return, its acceptance by CPC TDS and generation of TDS certificate mentioning Nature of Payment 194C, the question of levying Late Fee taking deduction of TDS u/s 194J is uncalled for, wrong and illegal. It may be added here that in Form 26Q, there

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

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

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

7. That the Ld. AO accepted the return u/s 148 as it is, as filed, for A.Y 2014- 15 and 2016-17 i.e; without making any addition, though the case was reopened on the same hypothetical theory of in genuine and bogus expenses of A.Y 2015-16 only. Since the return and books of account

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

7. That the Ld. AO accepted the return u/s 148 as it is, as filed, for A.Y 2014- 15 and 2016-17 i.e; without making any addition, though the case was reopened on the same hypothetical theory of in genuine and bogus expenses of A.Y 2015-16 only. Since the return and books of account

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

7. That the Ld. AO accepted the return u/s 148 as it is, as filed, for A.Y 2014- 15 and 2016-17 i.e; without making any addition, though the case was reopened on the same hypothetical theory of in genuine and bogus expenses of A.Y 2015-16 only. Since the return and books of account