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.

447 results for “TDS”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi447Mumbai303Bangalore208Chennai117Chandigarh114Karnataka106Hyderabad98Ahmedabad94Cochin69Kolkata62Jaipur57Indore41Pune40Raipur37Visakhapatnam24Agra20Rajkot16Guwahati15Cuttack14Dehradun12Lucknow9Nagpur9Amritsar9Patna8Surat7Allahabad3Panaji3SC2Calcutta2Telangana1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income76Section 6872Section 143(3)58Section 153A55Disallowance52Section 14A31Section 3719Section 13218Section 15416Section 234E

SERCO INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1432/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrianil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92C

TDS under section 195 of the Act. 11.1 The Assessee during the course of the argument of this appeal, with regard to selection of comparables for determination of Arm‟s Length Price, only agitated/pressed the grounds relating to inclusion of (i) TCS E-serve Ltd. (in short „TCS‟) and (ii) eClerx Services Ltd. (in short „eClerx‟) and for making

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 447 · Page 1 of 23

...
16
Search & Seizure15
Deduction13
ITA 2467/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS), Gurgaon Vs. Idea Cellular Limited, Haryana Circle in ITA No.2299/Del/2015 where the earlier decision dated 01.05.2018 was followed and the Department appeal was dismissed. He also brought to our attention the contentions of para 6 of the Tribunal Order dated 01.05.2018 (in ITA No. 852/Del/2015) where noting the absence of jurisdictional High Court on this issue, relating to Gurgaon

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 120/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS), Gurgaon Vs. Idea Cellular Limited, Haryana Circle in ITA No.2299/Del/2015 where the earlier decision dated 01.05.2018 was followed and the Department appeal was dismissed. He also brought to our attention the contentions of para 6 of the Tribunal Order dated 01.05.2018 (in ITA No. 852/Del/2015) where noting the absence of jurisdictional High Court on this issue, relating to Gurgaon

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 119/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS), Gurgaon Vs. Idea Cellular Limited, Haryana Circle in ITA No.2299/Del/2015 where the earlier decision dated 01.05.2018 was followed and the Department appeal was dismissed. He also brought to our attention the contentions of para 6 of the Tribunal Order dated 01.05.2018 (in ITA No. 852/Del/2015) where noting the absence of jurisdictional High Court on this issue, relating to Gurgaon

VODAFONE IDEA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2466/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS), Gurgaon Vs. Idea Cellular Limited, Haryana Circle in ITA No.2299/Del/2015 where the earlier decision dated 01.05.2018 was followed and the Department appeal was dismissed. He also brought to our attention the contentions of para 6 of the Tribunal Order dated 01.05.2018 (in ITA No. 852/Del/2015) where noting the absence of jurisdictional High Court on this issue, relating to Gurgaon

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, KARNAL

The appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 118/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS), Gurgaon Vs. Idea Cellular Limited, Haryana Circle in ITA No.2299/Del/2015 where the earlier decision dated 01.05.2018 was followed and the Department appeal was dismissed. He also brought to our attention the contentions of para 6 of the Tribunal Order dated 01.05.2018 (in ITA No. 852/Del/2015) where noting the absence of jurisdictional High Court on this issue, relating to Gurgaon

FIRESTONE INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS INC,UNITED STATES vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed and the impugned addition is deleted

ITA 1066/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), assessee had taken a plea that the company is a separate entity from its share holders/members and, with transfer of shares, assets of the company are not transferred, and the same continues to be held by the company. It was also explained that since the assessee did not have PAN at the time of sale of shares, buyer M/s Sundaram Industries Pvt. Ltd. deducted @20% plus surcharge and cess on such Long Term Capital Gain earned by the assessee, which is reflected in From 26AS an

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. SupriyaFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 112(1)Section 112(1)(c)Section 112(1)(ii)

Section 112(1)(c)(ii) taxing the income at 20% plus surcharge and cess. Assessee had reasonably explained the reasons for deduction of 20% of the TDS

N.K. ASSOCIATES (PROP. NAND KISHORE),DELHI vs. DCIT (TDS)- CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4798/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Singh SethiFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 206C(3)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

TDS)-CPC, Nand Kishore), 112 EIL Apartment, Plot No.13, vs Aayakar Bhawan, Pocket-6, Nasirpur Vaishali, Ghaziabad. Road, Dwarka, Delhi PAN ARAPK6330J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Jaspal Singh Sethi, Advocate. For Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. All the appeals by the Assessee are directed against

N.K. ASSOCIATES (PROP. NAND KISHORE),DELHI vs. DCIT (TDS)- CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4799/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Singh SethiFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 206C(3)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

TDS)-CPC, Nand Kishore), 112 EIL Apartment, Plot No.13, vs Aayakar Bhawan, Pocket-6, Nasirpur Vaishali, Ghaziabad. Road, Dwarka, Delhi PAN ARAPK6330J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Jaspal Singh Sethi, Advocate. For Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. All the appeals by the Assessee are directed against

N.K. ASSOCIATES (PROP. NAND KISHORE),DELHI vs. DCIT (TDS)- CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Singh SethiFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 206C(3)Section 234ESection 234E(1)

TDS)-CPC, Nand Kishore), 112 EIL Apartment, Plot No.13, vs Aayakar Bhawan, Pocket-6, Nasirpur Vaishali, Ghaziabad. Road, Dwarka, Delhi PAN ARAPK6330J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Jaspal Singh Sethi, Advocate. For Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. All the appeals by the Assessee are directed against

ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CAIRN UK HOLDING LTD., UK

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1199/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 112(1)Section 48

section 112(1) of the Act and claimed refund of the excess TDS. The Assessing Officer disallowed assessee’s claim

HERO MOTOCORP LTD (AS SUCCESSOR OF HERO INVESTMENT P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1053/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)

112 of the Act was applicable on the amount of capital gains computed as aforesaid. Though the question before AAR was only with regard to rate of tax applicable, the larger issue was certainly if the stock was valued appropriately. Thus to our mind the 16 quoted price of shares Rs.1439 of the JV company was not comparable with

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI vs. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5026/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4913/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

ARIVENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1308/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7112/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

M/S. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1944/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7637/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

112 on account of interest on late deposit of TDS without appreciating that such interest is an allowable expenditure under section

VODAFONE IDEA LTD (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LTD),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-50(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 209/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 201r

112/- 60,32,340/- 2,19,90,452/- liability 4. Being aggrieved appellant assessee preferred appeal before Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was dismissed vide order dated 8.11.2019. 5. In the present appeal Learned AR submitted that Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding order of ACIT (TDS) treating appellant as an assessee in default under

ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 1 , NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5708/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 144Section 153Section 32Section 37Section 40

TDS credit amounting to Rs. 2,22,50,916. 4 ITA No:-5708/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 7. That the Ld. AO erred on facts in allowing credit of the self-assessment tax of Rs. 21,54,42,020, as against Rs. 23,08,43,470 claimed by the appellant in its return of income, resulting in short credit