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.

294 results for “TDS”+ Section 25clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,842Mumbai2,803Bangalore1,534Chennai1,025Kolkata664Pune561Ahmedabad559Hyderabad552Jaipur318Indore312Cochin294Chandigarh292Raipur238Karnataka195Visakhapatnam141Surat134Cuttack129Nagpur109Rajkot107Lucknow85Jabalpur61Amritsar58Jodhpur51Dehradun41Guwahati38Ranchi37Agra31Allahabad29Telangana26Kerala26Panaji25Patna21SC12Varanasi10Calcutta7Rajasthan5Uttarakhand2Orissa2Bombay1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Limitation/Time-bar77Section 25021Section 2639TDS8Section 143(3)7Section 407Section 16Section 220(2)6Section 246A6Section 201

M/S.MALAYALAM COMMUNICATION LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 403/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)

25,310/- u/s 201(1) as well. I.T.A. No.403/Coch/2018 4.2 The CIT(A) observed from the above that payment made towards broadcasting and telecasting would be covered by section 194C only when the payment is made in pursuance of a contract signed between the parties concerned for the works relates to broadcasting and telecasting. The CIT(A) observed that broadcasting

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

Showing 1–20 of 294 · Page 1 of 15

...
6
Addition to Income5
Deduction4
ITA 236/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cochin
05 Jul 2018
AY 2012-13

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 240/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 238/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 242/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 241/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

ITA 239/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

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

Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 272ASection 272A(2)

25) I.T.A. Nos.236-242/C/2017 Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. (Para

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS(INDIA) P.LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 422/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sri.P.M.Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

section 194A of the Act are not applicable to interest paid by the Appellant to its Directors. The fact that the Appellant had paid interest directly to Bank would not alter the liability of the Appellant under the TDS provisions. Hence, the disallowance of Rs.25,25

DCIT, KANNUR vs. M/S MANJOO & CO.,, KANNUR

ITA 625/COCH/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

TDS of Rs.38,98,310/-. According to the Assessing Officer the assessee has not given the details of prize winning tickets and also no clarification as to whether prize winning amount relates to Kerala State Lotteries. On the basis of the details gathered from Lottery Department the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.55,88,795/- u/s. 115BB

MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

Section 194ASection 40Section 44A

25 I.T.A. No.68 /Coch/2018 7. We have carefully gone through the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Parliament by Finance Act, 2012 incorporated second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act with effect from 01-04-2013. For the purpose of convenience, we are reproducing second proviso as it is inserted by Finance

THE HEAD MISTRESS, AKILIYATH LP SCHOOL,KANNUR vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed

ITA 145/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 201Section 234E

25) Under these circumstances, no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of Section ITA No.145/Coch/2017. 6 The Headmistress AV High School. 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall

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

TDS was duly deducted at the time of actual credit payment to individual parties 8. The AO grossly erred in making a disallowance of Rs.5,59,29,379/-towards Gas Turbine Overhauling charges u/s 31(i) of the Act. 8.1 The ld. Assessing Officer has erred in not considering the fact that repairs are done to preserve and maintain

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)

25. The controversy surrounding the above amendment was whether the amendment being curative in nature should be applied retrospectively i.e., from the date of insertion of the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) or to be applicable from the date of enforcement. 26. TDS

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)

25. The controversy surrounding the above amendment was whether the amendment being curative in nature should be applied retrospectively i.e., from the date of insertion of the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) or to be applicable from the date of enforcement. 26. TDS

M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

ITA 328/COCH/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2016-17

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

ITA 326/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

ITA 327/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

ITA 331/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

ITA 329/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

ITA 301/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

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

Section 201(1)

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue