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.

11 results for “TDS”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi551Mumbai400Bangalore160Karnataka109Chennai99Kolkata65Pune58Jaipur52Ahmedabad46Chandigarh25Hyderabad19Amritsar16Indore13Cuttack12Cochin11Nagpur10Visakhapatnam7Guwahati7Lucknow6Rajkot5Varanasi4Kerala3SC3Raipur3Telangana3Dehradun2Patna2Ranchi2Surat2Calcutta1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E43Section 23411TDS11Section 20010Section 408Section 698Section 206C6Deduction6Section 1324Section 153C

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 8/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Yedhu Krishanan G., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 234Section 234E

Section 234 E of the IT act 61 amounting to Rs. l,52,971 for delay in filing of TDS

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 7/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin
4
Unexplained Cash Credit4
Unexplained Investment4
29 Jul 2022
AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Yedhu Krishanan G., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 234Section 234E

Section 234 E of the IT act 61 amounting to Rs. l,52,971 for delay in filing of TDS

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 9/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jul 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Yedhu Krishanan G., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 234Section 234E

Section 234 E of the IT act 61 amounting to Rs. l,52,971 for delay in filing of TDS

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS & TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/COCH/2022[QUARTER-II 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

234 E(Quarter-4) is therefore illegal and liable to be cancelled. (4) The authority below ought have considered the judgment of the Hon’ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA 145/Coch/2017 dated 17-09-2018 in similar issue. Appellant could not file the copy of the Tribunal’s judgments before the first appellate authority. The said judgment

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 887/COCH/2022[QUARTER-IV 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2023

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234E

234 E(Quarter-4) is therefore illegal and liable to be cancelled. (4) The authority below ought have considered the judgment of the Hon’ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA 145/Coch/2017 dated 17-09-2018 in similar issue. Appellant could not file the copy of the Tribunal’s judgments before the first appellate authority. The said judgment

DHUSAN MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANNUR, KERALA vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KANNUR, KERALA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 288/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Riju AC, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 206CSection 234Section 234ESection 234E(3)

TDS return. It is next contended that levy of interest u/s 234E of the Act is not a mandatory in all cases. However, the ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of CPC. 4. Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. 5. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before

DHUSAN MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANNUR, KERALA vs. ITO, KANNUR, KERALA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 287/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Riju AC, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 206CSection 234Section 234ESection 234E(3)

TDS return. It is next contended that levy of interest u/s 234E of the Act is not a mandatory in all cases. However, the ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of CPC. 4. Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. 5. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 222/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

section 234 A and 2348. The Hon. Tribunal vide its order in ITA No.916 to 919/Coch/2022 dated 2/05/2024 in the case of Santhimadom Ayurniketan Trust has remanded the issue back to CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Copy of the ITAT order is attached herewith.” In the above said written submission, the assessee is not pressing ground

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

section 234 A and 2348. The Hon. Tribunal vide its order in ITA No.916 to 919/Coch/2022 dated 2/05/2024 in the case of Santhimadom Ayurniketan Trust has remanded the issue back to CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Copy of the ITAT order is attached herewith.” In the above said written submission, the assessee is not pressing ground

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 221/COCH/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

section 234 A and 2348. The Hon. Tribunal vide its order in ITA No.916 to 919/Coch/2022 dated 2/05/2024 in the case of Santhimadom Ayurniketan Trust has remanded the issue back to CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Copy of the ITAT order is attached herewith.” In the above said written submission, the assessee is not pressing ground

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

section 234 A and 2348. The Hon. Tribunal vide its order in ITA No.916 to 919/Coch/2022 dated 2/05/2024 in the case of Santhimadom Ayurniketan Trust has remanded the issue back to CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Copy of the ITAT order is attached herewith.” In the above said written submission, the assessee is not pressing ground