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.

4 results for “TDS”+ Section 46Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi309Mumbai254Kolkata99Chennai84Hyderabad58Ahmedabad56Bangalore37Jaipur37Indore26Lucknow23Chandigarh20Pune19Rajkot19Cuttack16Surat12Raipur11Visakhapatnam9Patna8Jabalpur5Panaji5Jodhpur4Cochin4Amritsar3Allahabad3Ranchi3Guwahati3Nagpur3Varanasi1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 206C4Section 206C(6)4TDS4Section 206C(7)2Section 6A2Section 1392Section 402Penalty2Business Income2Unexplained Cash Credit

SRI. GEORGE MATHEW,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

TDS liability may arise if composite bills have been issued.” “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the assessing officer treating Agricultural Income as Business Income. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of 10% of expenses amounting

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. SRI. GEORGE MATHEW, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

2
Disallowance2
Addition to Income2
ITA 220/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

TDS liability may arise if composite bills have been issued.” “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the assessing officer treating Agricultural Income as Business Income. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of 10% of expenses amounting

CORPORATION OF CALICUT,CALICUT vs. DCIT(TDS), CALICUT

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed by upholding the order of the AO

ITA 109/COCH/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: ---- None ----For Respondent: Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)Section 6A

TDS) and paid further tax and during the course of examination of the issue had not filed any certificate or, any evidence regarding filing of return by the person concerned from whom appellant is supposed to collect TCS. Now appellant is coming forward with fresh evidences without any proper explanation as to why same could not be furnished before

CORPORATION OF CALICUT,CALICUT vs. DCIT(TDS), CALICUT

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed by upholding the order of the AO

ITA 110/COCH/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: ---- None ----For Respondent: Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)Section 6A

TDS) and paid further tax and during the course of examination of the issue had not filed any certificate or, any evidence regarding filing of return by the person concerned from whom appellant is supposed to collect TCS. Now appellant is coming forward with fresh evidences without any proper explanation as to why same could not be furnished before