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.

4 results for “TDS”+ Section 35Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai78Delhi58Chennai39Raipur17Ahmedabad10Hyderabad8Rajkot6Kolkata6Bangalore4Visakhapatnam2Cuttack2Karnataka1Nagpur1Jaipur1Dehradun1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 35D13Section 1545Section 143(3)4Section 14A4Section 10A4Deduction4Addition to Income3Disallowance2

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , BELLARY vs. M/S. SOUTH WEST MINING LIMITED, BELLARY

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 457/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2011-12 Ito M/S. South West Mining Limited Aayakar Bhavan Staff Road Vidya Nagar Fort Bellary Near Talur Cross Karnataka Toranagallu Vs. Bellary 583 201 Karnataka Pan No : Aafcs9792M Appellant Respondent C.O. No.4/Bang/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.457/Bang/2023) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. South West Mining Limited Ito Vs. Bellary 583 201 Ward-1 Karnataka Bellary Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Appeal By Revenue & Co By Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Nfac For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Dated 21.4.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Revenue In This Appeal Raised Following Ground: “Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.287.72 Crores Claimed Towards “Mine Development Expenditure” U/S 37(1) In The Computation Of Income Which Was Not Routed Through The Profit & Loss Account.”

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B
Section 250
Section 37
Section 37(1)

TDS the payments made by it to the two concerns (M/s PC Patel & Company and M/s HD Enterprises} that were engaged by the assessee for execution of excavation contract. Thus, it emerges that the assessee engaged the above mentioned two concerns as mere work contractors for excavation while BLMCL engaged the assessee for mine development and extraction of lignite

SHEL MRPL AVIATION FULES AND SERVICES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3216/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

section 35D and hence cannot be termed as preliminary expenditure. Pending the obtainment of PAN, TAN, indirect tax and other statutory registrations does not refrain the assessee from commencing its operations. The procedures for obtaining the aforesaid registrations were carried out after the operations of assessee’s business had commenced. Accordingly, these expenses are not, in principal, pre-operative expenses

SUBEX LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 373/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhury

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 35D

35D of the Act. Even though ITAT did not agree on the other issue of excluding securities premium and assessee is in appeal before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, the assessee submitted that the eligible amount based on the ITAT order in this regard as under:- Sl. Particulars Amount No. (in INR) 1. GDR Face Value (as already allowed

M/S, SUBEX LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed while the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2249/BANG/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri B.R.Baskaranita No.2249(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Subex Limited, Rmz Ecoworld, Outer Ring Road, Devarabisanahlli, Bangalore-560 103 Panno.Aabcs9255R Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(1)(2), Bangalore Respondent & Ita No.2361(B)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) (By Revenue) Appellant By : Shri Aditya Raipuria, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Raipuria, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 35D

35D as well. “6. We have heard the rival submissions. It is noticed from the order of CIT(Appeals) that in assessee's own case for AY 2010-11, the Tribunal has held that disallowance of business service-marketing charges will go to increase the profits of the business which is eligible for deduction u/s. 10AA