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.

542 results for “TDS”+ Section 40A(7)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi542Mumbai514Chennai264Bangalore236Kolkata205Hyderabad64Jaipur57Ahmedabad55Indore49Raipur39Pune33Chandigarh30Visakhapatnam25Rajkot24Lucknow18Surat18Cuttack17Patna14Guwahati13Jodhpur12Amritsar10Nagpur10Cochin9Karnataka7Agra5Dehradun4Ranchi4Varanasi4Calcutta3Jabalpur3Panaji2Allahabad2SC1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)81Addition to Income80Disallowance63Section 153A44Section 14A41Section 4038Deduction33TDS33Section 40a24Section 147

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 441 / 2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

40A(5) of the Act now stands, it is not possible to answer the said question in the manner suggested by the Department. Accordingly, we answer question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 24. Parliament was aware of the pre-existing law, and therefore, stepped in to clarify that only a monetary benefit

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA/441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

40A(5) of the Act now stands, it is not possible to answer the said question in the manner suggested by the Department. Accordingly, we answer question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 24. Parliament was aware of the pre-existing law, and therefore, stepped in to clarify that only a monetary benefit

Showing 1–20 of 542 · Page 1 of 28

...
23
Natural Justice19
Depreciation18

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA-441/2003HC Delhi31 Jul 2013

40A(5) of the Act now stands, it is not possible to answer the said question in the manner suggested by the Department. Accordingly, we answer question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 24. Parliament was aware of the pre-existing law, and therefore, stepped in to clarify that only a monetary benefit

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,, DELHI

ITA 3883/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR
Section 142Section 147Section 153Section 153ASection 201(1)Section 36Section 40Section 40A(3)

40A(3) of I.T. Act, 1961. 3(i). That on facts and circumstances of case, Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance of Rs. 25,000/- on ground of non-deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act, 1961. (ii) That there is no case of applicability of TDS provisions on nature of payments

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the above appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 179/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 263Section 40Section 40A(3)

TDS has been deducted on payment to agents ignoring the fact that the payment were made to suppliers by agent on behalf of appellant. 4. That the appellant craves liberty to add, alter or varies any ground of Appeal either before or at the time of hearing.” 5. The assessee has also raised the following additional grounds :- 5. That without

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the above appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 180/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 263Section 40Section 40A(3)

TDS has been deducted on payment to agents ignoring the fact that the payment were made to suppliers by agent on behalf of appellant. 4. That the appellant craves liberty to add, alter or varies any ground of Appeal either before or at the time of hearing.” 5. The assessee has also raised the following additional grounds :- 5. That without

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the above appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 178/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 263Section 40Section 40A(3)

TDS has been deducted on payment to agents ignoring the fact that the payment were made to suppliers by agent on behalf of appellant. 4. That the appellant craves liberty to add, alter or varies any ground of Appeal either before or at the time of hearing.” 5. The assessee has also raised the following additional grounds :- 5. That without

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

40a(i) of the Act, for non- deduction of TDS under section 195 of the Act. 7 Serco India Pvt. Ltd. 11. The Assessee

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

7 2.40 crores made from the parties 37 who are related parties in terms of accounting standard 18 issued by the Institute of chartered accountants of India but not in terms of provisions of section 40A (2) of the income tax act. In the result ground No. 11 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” The purchase prices

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-11, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

7 2.40 crores made from the parties who are related parties in terms of accounting standard 18 issued by the section 40A (2) of the income tax act. In the result ground No. 11 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” The purchase prices of components which are purchased from various suppliers are based upon negotiations with such vendors

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.13,29,998/-. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.87,288/- on account of interest on delay deposit of TDS.” 2. Since

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.13,29,998/-. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.87,288/- on account of interest on delay deposit of TDS.” 2. Since

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.13,29,998/-. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.87,288/- on account of interest on delay deposit of TDS.” 2. Since

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2556/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2555/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2557/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2836/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2554/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2558/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2839/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Harish Choudhary CAFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

7,99,23 30,77,96 5- 772 ,060 ,156 ,904 9+8,52,408 =38,77,19,770 ,277 ,