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.

38 results for “TDS”+ Section 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi326Mumbai312Bangalore201Chennai93Karnataka90Kolkata78Ahmedabad54Cochin38Chandigarh35Pune33Jaipur33Ranchi28Indore26Cuttack23Raipur22Surat18Hyderabad16Visakhapatnam13Lucknow13Rajkot9Amritsar5SC5Dehradun5Telangana4Jodhpur4Guwahati3Allahabad2Calcutta1Agra1Nagpur1Panaji1Patna1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 234E45Section 200A27Addition to Income26Section 4013TDS13Section 244A10Section 10B5Disallowance5Section 2014Section 143(3)

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

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

ITA 609/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35Section 43(1)Section 92C

245,393,000 R&D expense incurred by Apollo 128,114,109 Vredestein BV, Netherlands; Vredestein GmbH, Germany and Apollo Tyres Global R&D BV, Netherlands R&D expense incurred for testing of tyres 12,510,307 outside India Other R&D expense incurred at Limda 20,868,464 (Vadodra) Total 406,885,880 5 Apollo Tyres

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

4
Section 144C(5)4
Deduction3

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 475/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 134/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 144C(5)Section 190Section 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 92C(3)

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

ADCIT, THRISSUR vs. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD,, TRICHUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 635/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.635 /Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), St. Mary’S College Road, Thrissur. Thrissur-680020. [Pan: Aabct 0024D]

Section 140ASection 143(1)(a)Section 244ASection 244A(1)

245 (Mum). In that case also, the return of income filed by the assessee was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and no interest u/s. 244A was allowed by the Assessing officer. The refund was arising due to the excess payment of self-assessment tax. After examining the legislative history of section 244A which was brought

HI-LITE BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOZHIKODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/COCH/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Shameem Ahamed, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

CANARA BANK,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT (TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 474/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194ASection 201

245 ITR 13) that interest u/s. 201(1A) should be charged only upto the date on which deductee assessee paid the tax on total income. I.T.A. No. 474/Coch/2018 2. The CIT(A) did not consider the evidence produced by the appellant that the deductee (Kerala State Beverages Corporation) had included the interest paid by this appellant in its total income

THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.EXTRAWEAVE P. LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 448/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Arattukulangara Complex 264B/Cmc 1 Vs. A.N. Puram, Alapuzha 688011 Sakteeswara Junction Cherthala 688524 Pan – Aabce5438L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 10BSection 10B(3)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 195(6)Section 40

245 CTR 97 (Ker.) has held that the business profit is to be computed necessarily after setting off unabsorbed depreciation carried forward from previous years. For these and other grounds that may be advanced at the time of hearing, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) on the above points may be set aside and that

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 594/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 591/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 592/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 597/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 596/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 589/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 595/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 593/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

ROSHAN FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 590/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Aug 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. A Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

245 49,000 4,55,938 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessees filed appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the A.O.’s orders for levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 30/COCH/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 13(i)c(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, it was assessed as on AOP doing business in running of the college and the Trustees were doing business in the guise of charity. Ground No. 1 : Denial of exemption u/s. 11: A.Ys 2004-05 to 2010-11 17. The CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer was correct

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 31/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 13(i)c(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, it was assessed as on AOP doing business in running of the college and the Trustees were doing business in the guise of charity. Ground No. 1 : Denial of exemption u/s. 11: A.Ys 2004-05 to 2010-11 17. The CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer was correct

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 213/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 13(i)c(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, it was assessed as on AOP doing business in running of the college and the Trustees were doing business in the guise of charity. Ground No. 1 : Denial of exemption u/s. 11: A.Ys 2004-05 to 2010-11 17. The CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer was correct

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 27/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 13(i)c(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, it was assessed as on AOP doing business in running of the college and the Trustees were doing business in the guise of charity. Ground No. 1 : Denial of exemption u/s. 11: A.Ys 2004-05 to 2010-11 17. The CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer was correct