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.

118 results for “TDS”+ Section 88clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,334Mumbai1,205Bangalore574Chennai461Indore429Kolkata288Hyderabad269Ahmedabad247Pune189Jaipur155Chandigarh143Karnataka124Visakhapatnam123Cochin118Raipur112Cuttack95Ranchi67Surat57Amritsar40Guwahati36Agra33Rajkot33Lucknow32Jodhpur26Nagpur26Allahabad21Patna19Kerala18Telangana13Dehradun13SC7Jabalpur5Calcutta3Panaji2Gauhati1Varanasi1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 25095Section 201(1)32Addition to Income32TDS17Section 26316Section 15412Deduction12Section 143(3)11Section 4011Section 234E

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 64/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Written submission by Smt.Lakshmi N., CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 192Section 194Section 40

88,000 made by the appellant on which TDS has already been deducted @ 30% u/s. 192 by treating the said payment as rent u/s. 1941. The Learned Assessing Officer as well as the Learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that tax for the rent amount included as perquisite in salary was deducted in accordance with the provisions

Showing 1–20 of 118 · Page 1 of 6

10
Disallowance10
Section 1928

SRI.V.J.FRANCIS M/S.LISCO COIR TEX,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT,, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 65/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Written submission by Smt.Lakshmi N., CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)Section 192Section 194Section 40

88,000 made by the appellant on which TDS has already been deducted @ 30% u/s. 192 by treating the said payment as rent u/s. 1941. The Learned Assessing Officer as well as the Learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that tax for the rent amount included as perquisite in salary was deducted in accordance with the provisions

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 returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 not considering decision of the jurisdictional Hon ITAT Cochin Bench in the of Little Servant of Divine ITA 07-09 & SP 01-03/Coch/2022 2 M/s. MATHIIT Learning Pvt. Ltd. Providence Charitable Trust

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

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 7/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jul 2022AY 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 returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 not considering decision of the jurisdictional Hon ITAT Cochin Bench in the of Little Servant of Divine ITA 07-09 & SP 01-03/Coch/2022 2 M/s. MATHIIT Learning Pvt. Ltd. Providence Charitable Trust

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 returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 not considering decision of the jurisdictional Hon ITAT Cochin Bench in the of Little Servant of Divine ITA 07-09 & SP 01-03/Coch/2022 2 M/s. MATHIIT Learning Pvt. Ltd. Providence Charitable Trust

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

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 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 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 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 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

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 to the credit of Central Government during the period May,2009 to July,2009 i.e. before the due date specified i 139(1) of the Act for filing the return of Income. On such facts and circumstances the appellant submits that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked and the disallowance made is unjustified

THE ITO, WARD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.MARTIN JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 354/COCH/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

SRI.ESSA ISMAIL SAIT,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT,CIR-2(1),, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 605/COCH/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.E.J.SONY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 355/COCH/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.PAUL, EDAKATTUKUDIYIL, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 449/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.MATHAI XAVIER, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 451/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.TOMY MATHEW PARTNER OF MATHAI SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 419/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.JOSE MATHEW, M/S.E.V.MTHAI & SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 450/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THEACIT, CIR-1(1),EKM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

ITA 453/COCH/2007[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2019AY 1999-2000

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

Section 2(24)(vi)Section 48

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned