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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Section 147clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,221Delhi1,020Bangalore561Chennai437Kolkata238Hyderabad237Ahmedabad196Pune126Jaipur124Karnataka123Chandigarh107Cochin72Indore65Raipur58Visakhapatnam54Surat48Rajkot45Lucknow38Nagpur31Patna29Jodhpur18Agra15Amritsar15Ranchi15Guwahati15Cuttack13Panaji10Jabalpur9Telangana5Allahabad4SC3Dehradun2Calcutta2Varanasi1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 1474Section 260A2Section 1442Section 143(3)2Reopening of Assessment2TDS2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. DEBABRATA BANERJEE

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed

ITAT/292/2024HC Calcutta18 Jul 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 18Th July, 2025.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 260ASection 69A

147 read with Section 144 of the Act. We have carefully perused the order passed by the learned Tribunal and noted the facts in detail. It cannot be disputed by the revenue that the initial assessment was a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. The assessee, Ajit Kumar Banerjee, had filed the return of the income

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL SALE CO LTD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed

ITAT/71/2022HC Calcutta29 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

Section 147Section 260A

Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was bad in law? iii) Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed in law by holding that assessing officer erred in jumping to the consolation that assessee’s income ahs escaped assessment on receipt of certain information and assessing officer could not have formed a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped