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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 115Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Chandigarh6Mumbai2Jaipur1Kolkata1

Key Topics

Section 153A24Section 13218Section 115C6Deduction6Double Taxation/DTAA6Disallowance6Addition to Income6

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 473/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 470/CHANDI/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 472/CHANDI/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 474/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 469/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made

KARNAIL SINGH vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, ground no. 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 471/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 115CSection 132Section 153A

115C of the I.T. Act and tax should have been charged @20%. This provision of the act has not been correctly interpreted and has been wrongly ignored for assessment. 9. That, without prejudice, the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and U.K. has been wrongly interpreted. Even on the basis of stated facts and observations made