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.

11 results for “TDS”+ Section 57clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,600 Mumbai1,537 Bangalore877 Chennai471 Kolkata331 Ahmedabad232 Indore215 Chandigarh194 Hyderabad185 Cochin161 Karnataka153 Jaipur138 Pune106 Lucknow56 Rajkot54 Raipur49 Visakhapatnam48 Surat41 Cuttack34 Ranchi34 Jodhpur26 Agra22 Dehradun17 Allahabad16 Guwahati14 Nagpur13 Telangana11 Amritsar11 SC9 Varanasi8 Jabalpur7 Patna6 Panaji5 Punjab & Haryana5 J&K2 Himachal Pradesh2 Uttarakhand2 Calcutta1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)16 Section 26312 Addition to Income10 TDS6 Section 2505 Section 10(37)5 Section 2(22)(e)4 Disallowance4 Section 69C3 Section 143(2)

SHRI KEWAL KRISHAN,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, ZIRA

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

ITA 541/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Kuldip Singh Sra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manpreet Singh Duggal, Sr. DR

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 28(2)Section 3ASection 3A(1)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 57

TDS of Rs.4,07,893/- was effected on the said amount @ 20%+3% CESS. 8. In terms of the provisions of sub section (iv) of section 57

3

SHRI KANAV KHANNA,,AMRITSAR. vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the ground no- G of appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 77/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar04 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Magow, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rahul Dhawan, CIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 250(6)

57,41,680/- for acquisition of land. The TDS was deducted amount to Rs. 96,80,881/- u/s. 194LA of the Act. Accordingly, the assessee claimed exemption u/s. `10(37) in the Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) during the filing his return. During the assessment proceedings the ld. AO made verification and called the revenue record. Sh. Jagjit Singh Patwari

SHRI SUBASH GUPTA,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 671/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, C. A

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 69

Section 69 is upheld. The appellant's explanations lack substantive evidence to overturn the AO's conclusions. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed, and the assessment order is sustained.” 5 I.T.A. No. 671/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 6. Now the assessee is before the tribunal on the grounds contained in the memorandum of appeal. 7. The Ld. AR in course

M/S. SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

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

ITA 193/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 144C(8)Section 250oSection 69C

TDS Certificate in Form 16A related to deduction of tax at source. The ld. AR fully denied that the assessee had no transaction with the RolmexInternational, as alleged by the revenue. The ld. AR placed that the details as below: I.T.A. No.193/Asr/2022 33 Assessment Year: 2018-19 “18. Addition of Rs. 4,57,32,318/- on account of alleged bogus

SH. AMRINDER SINGH DHIMAN,NAKODAR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE PHAGWARA, PHAGWARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 584/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, Sr DR

Section 40a(ia) states that any amount on which tax is deductible at source and such tax has not been deducted or after deduction has not been paid then such sum shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head 'profits of business or profession'. d. In the present case, TDS was to be deducted

MESERS G.G CONTINEENTAL TRADES PVT.LTD,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-I, BATHINDA

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

ITA 189/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.189/Asr/2018 Assessment Years: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

57 ITR 521 (SC) the concept of the real income .is ascertained. We fully relied on the order on ITAT-Bangalore Bench in the case of M/S Bagmane Construction Pvt Ltd(supra). The section 2(22)(e) is deemingprovision.A plain reading of the provisions reveals that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act will be attracted

MEASAGE G. G OILS & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1 , BATHINDA

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

ITA 513/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.189/Asr/2018 Assessment Years: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

57 ITR 521 (SC) the concept of the real income .is ascertained. We fully relied on the order on ITAT-Bangalore Bench in the case of M/S Bagmane Construction Pvt Ltd(supra). The section 2(22)(e) is deemingprovision.A plain reading of the provisions reveals that the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act will be attracted

NARINDER AND COMPANY,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(5), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 93/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, C.A. and Sh. V.S. AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 263p

TDS returns, VAT returns, details of creditors, debtors, etc. As such, the issue of cash deposited during demonetization period and the source was duly explained by the assessee to the Assessing Officer and as such the 'financial results' along with the cash book of the assessee were properly examined and considered by the Assessing Officer, while framing the assessment

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 was made by the Ld. AO in accordance with the reporting as per Tax Audit Report which was not added back in Computation of Income at the time of filing of Return of Income. I.T.A. No.407/Asr/2019 5 Assessment Year: 2015-16 3.3. Further, the disallowance amount of Rs. 5,28,924/- was made on account of depreciation claimed

SMT. SATVIR KAUR W/O SH. SHINDER SINGH,FEROZEPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 102/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

section 263 of the l. T. Act, 1 9 6 1 after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. 4. The case was reopened on the reasons that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 60,00,000 in her saving bank account maintained with the Oriental Bank of Commerce during the financial year 2010-11 and that no voluntary return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR vs. SHRIMATI RAJ RANI ARORA, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 10/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

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

57,00,000 - 2,23,214 )= Rs. 67,16,786/-. 11 I.T.A. No. 10/Asr/2020 Dy. CIT v. Raj Rani Arora In the cash flow statement of Sh. Amandeep Singh for the F.Y. 2013-14 he has shown opening cash balance as on 01.04.2013 was of Rs. 31,01,679/-. The appellant has explained the generation of opening cashing hand