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.

223 results for “TDS”+ Section 80clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,611Delhi1,578Bangalore778Chennai509Kolkata371Ahmedabad310Hyderabad286Karnataka259Cochin223Indore217Chandigarh209Pune187Jaipur184Raipur108Cuttack78Surat77Visakhapatnam76Rajkot63Nagpur48Lucknow45Agra35Jodhpur30Amritsar28Guwahati28Dehradun25Telangana17Patna17Allahabad16Ranchi16Varanasi11Jabalpur7SC6Panaji5Uttarakhand2Calcutta1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 25084Section 201(1)46Section 80P39Limitation/Time-bar24TDS20Addition to Income18Deduction18Section 194A16Section 15415Section 263

M/S WAYANAD DIST. CO.OP BANK LTD.,WAYANAD vs. ITO(TDS), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

ITA 960/COCH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

80 to 83/Coch/2022 M/s. Wayanad District Co-op. Bank Ltd. credited to the interest payable account and thereore the same is not liable to TDS under Section

M/S WAYANAD DIST. CO.OP BANK LTD.,WAYANAD vs. ITO(TDS), KOZHIKODE

Showing 1–20 of 223 · Page 1 of 12

...
14
Section 153C12
Section 80P(2)(a)11

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

ITA 961/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

80 to 83/Coch/2022 M/s. Wayanad District Co-op. Bank Ltd. credited to the interest payable account and thereore the same is not liable to TDS under Section

M/S WAYANAD DIST. CO.OP BANK LTD.,WAYANAD vs. ITO(TDS), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

ITA 958/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

80 to 83/Coch/2022 M/s. Wayanad District Co-op. Bank Ltd. credited to the interest payable account and thereore the same is not liable to TDS under Section

M/S WAYANAD DIST. CO.OP BANK LTD.,WAYANAD vs. ITO(TDS), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

ITA 959/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jammuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

80 to 83/Coch/2022 M/s. Wayanad District Co-op. Bank Ltd. credited to the interest payable account and thereore the same is not liable to TDS under Section

M/S. NEDUMATTOM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,IDUKKI vs. THE ITO, THODUPIZHA

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

ITA 189/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Arun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 263Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

80 P of the Act. The finding of the PCIT that no details were called for by the assessing officer regarding interest is erroneous and factually incorrect" The assessing officer had asked for the details vide section 142(1) notice to which details were furnished by the appellant. 9. The PCIT failed to follow the judgment of the jurisdictional High

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

80,28,91.589/- u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act as against the expenditure certified by DSIR of Rs. 24,53,93,000/- in Form 3CL. The AO was of the opinion that the details of expenditure incurred during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration is as under: - Particulars Amount in Rs. R&D as allowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, KANNUR vs. KANNUR BUILDING MATERIALS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue ITA No

ITA 600/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps .......... Appellant Aayakar Bhavban, Chovva P.O., Kannur 670006 Vs. Kannur Building Materials Co-Op. Society Ltd .......... Respondent No. C 1741, Pappinissery P.O., Kannur 670561 [Pan: Aaaak7151K]

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 250Section 40Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) i.e., collective disposal of labour of the members of the society. 5.5 In this regard, based on the facts narrated above, I hold that the appellant is not eligible to claim 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) of the Act. 5.6 In Ground no. 4 of the appeal, appellant has taken the plea that

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

ITA 1016/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Ms. Anjana A, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction u/s 80P of the Act was disallowed by AO mainly 4. on the ground that the assessee is mainly in to banking business and not providing advances/credit for agriculture and Rural Development Activities. According

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

ITA 1017/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Ms. Anjana A, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction u/s 80P of the Act was disallowed by AO mainly 4. on the ground that the assessee is mainly in to banking business and not providing advances/credit for agriculture and Rural Development Activities. According

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

ITA 1015/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Ms. Anjana A, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction u/s 80P of the Act was disallowed by AO mainly 4. on the ground that the assessee is mainly in to banking business and not providing advances/credit for agriculture and Rural Development Activities. According

NAHAS HOSPITAL,PARAPPANANGADI vs. THE ACIT TDS, KOZHIKKODE

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

ITA 117/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Nahas Hospital Acit (Tds) (Osd) Pp/Xvll/191 Kozhiikode Vs. Parappanagadi Malappuram 676303 Pan –Aadfn5549C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 194C(5)Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") was conducted by the Income Tax officers (TDS) in the premises of M/s. Nahas Hospital on 20.08.2013. During the course of survey various details were collected. It was observed that out of the total professional fee collected 80

INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

ITA 592/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Bineesha Baby,AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.. Leena Lal, Sr, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

80,844/- under Section 40A(ia) for disallowance of expenses where TDS was not deducted. The assessee denied the status

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

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

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 25/COCH/2018[2009-10(Qtr-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 27/COCH/2018[2009-10 (Qtr-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 23/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 24/COCH/2018[2009-10 (Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 26/COCH/2018[2009-10 (Qutr-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with

QATAR AIRWAYS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 28/COCH/2018[2011-12( Qtr-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019

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

For Appellant: Sri.Rajeev. RFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 197Section 201(1)

TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with