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.

5 results for “TDS”+ Section 111Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai51Ahmedabad8Kolkata5Delhi5Surat2Bangalore2Chandigarh2Jaipur1

Key Topics

Section 14A8Section 111A7Short Term Capital Gains5Business Income5Section 10(38)4Capital Gains4Long Term Capital Gains4Addition to Income4Section 143(3)3Set Off of Losses

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI RAJIV KAPOOR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4989/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Laliet Kumarita No. 4989/Del /2012 [Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A.C.I.T Vs. Shri Rajiv Kapooor Circle - 22(1) C/O H.L. Kapoor Investment & New Delhi Financial Consultants 5, Trimurti Building [Basement], Community Centre, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan : Aampk 0195 Q [Appellant] [Respondent] Department By : Shri Kartar Singh, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Amit Sharma, Ca Shri Prashant Sharma, Ca Date Of Hearing : 09.03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2016 Order

For Appellant: Shri Amit Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kartar Singh, CIT-DR
Section 194H

TDS. The ld. AR further contended taht the assessee’s investment activities are not ancilliary activities and cannot be regarded as commercial activities. 5. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) came to the conclusion as given hereinbelow: “{4.1} The appellant has also credibly argued that the investment in shares was invariably disclosed in the books

3
TDS2

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DEWSOFT OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3945/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-3945/Del/2010 (A.Y 2007-08)

Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 14ASection 194JSection 40Section 44B

TDS was made on payment of such charges aggregating to Rs.58,700/- to Shri Gaurav Mehra. The assessee furnished the copies of bills raised to Shri Gaurav Mehra. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee has made the payments to Shri Gaurav Mehra without deducting tax at source in violation of provisions of Section 194J of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 820/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

111A of the Act applicable from the AY 2005-06, the assessee cannot be categorised as an investor, especially when the aforesaid facts speak otherwise and the Id. AR did not place any material, other than resolution dated 22.4.2005, before us while the auditor reports and facts for the years under consideration reflecting intention of the assessee, lead

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5054/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

111A of the Act applicable from the AY 2005-06, the assessee cannot be categorised as an investor, especially when the aforesaid facts speak otherwise and the Id. AR did not place any material, other than resolution dated 22.4.2005, before us while the auditor reports and facts for the years under consideration reflecting intention of the assessee, lead

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PURAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3078/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

111A of the Act applicable from the AY 2005-06, the assessee cannot be categorised as an investor, especially when the aforesaid facts speak otherwise and the Id. AR did not place any material, other than resolution dated 22.4.2005, before us while the auditor reports and facts for the years under consideration reflecting intention of the assessee, lead