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.

44 results for “TDS”+ Section 23clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,872Delhi2,845Bangalore1,536Chennai1,021Kolkata666Pune583Hyderabad548Ahmedabad540Indore397Chandigarh341Cochin337Jaipur323Raipur241Karnataka199Visakhapatnam155Surat149Cuttack138Nagpur110Rajkot107Jabalpur87Lucknow78Amritsar56Ranchi52Jodhpur48Guwahati44Dehradun37Agra33Allahabad32Telangana26Panaji25Patna23SC15Varanasi11Kerala10Calcutta8Uttarakhand2Orissa1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Himachal Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)31Section 153C29Section 234E28Disallowance27Addition to Income27TDS24Section 25017Section 44A15Section 26314Depreciation

TRIDENT INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), GUWAHATI

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 10(26)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 250Section 40Section 69C

23,72,500/- were claimed to be exempt from TDS I.T.A. No. 254/GTY/2024 Trident Infraprojects Private Limited under Section 10(26) of the Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG vs. M/S. DHAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, SHILLONG

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

14
Section 4013
Section 201(1)12

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ITA 181/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Jan 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 15Section 192Section 194HSection 197(2)Section 40

23-03-2020 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Shillong [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2017-18. AY 2017-18 Dhar Construction Co., . Page 2 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds:- 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deducting that

GOLDEN ARROW TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 233/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Jun 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 194JSection 40

23,364/- by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the Id. AO has made the disallowance arbitrarily and without bringing on record any material to show that such payment to a person exceeded Rs. 1,80,0001- during the relevant year.” 3. Coming to ground no. 2 i.e disallowance

ASSISTANT GARRISON ENGINEERING INDEPENDENT AGARTALA,AGARTALA vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 172, 173 & 177/GTY/2020 are allowed while ITA

ITA 177/GTY/2020[2014-15 (FY 2013-14; Q-2-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 172/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 &

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. I Gyaneshori Devi, JCIT
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority under law. Hence, the same can be said as illegal and invalid. 24. If the facts

ASSISTANT GARRISON ENGINEERING INDEPENDENT AGARTALA,AGARTALA vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 172, 173 & 177/GTY/2020 are allowed while ITA

ITA 172/GTY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 172/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 &

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. I Gyaneshori Devi, JCIT
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority under law. Hence, the same can be said as illegal and invalid. 24. If the facts

ASSISTANT GARRISON ENGINEERING INDEPENDENT AGARTALA,AGARTALA vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 172, 173 & 177/GTY/2020 are allowed while ITA

ITA 173/GTY/2020[2014-15(FY 2013-14;Q-1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 172/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 &

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. I Gyaneshori Devi, JCIT
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority under law. Hence, the same can be said as illegal and invalid. 24. If the facts

ASSISTANT GARRISON ENGINEERING INDEPENDENT AGARTALA,AGARTALA vs. DCIT,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, ITA Nos. 172, 173 & 177/GTY/2020 are allowed while ITA

ITA 174/GTY/2020[2015-16 (FY 2014-15; Q-4-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 172/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 &

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. I Gyaneshori Devi, JCIT
Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority under law. Hence, the same can be said as illegal and invalid. 24. If the facts

SAUQUL ISLAM,NORTH LAKHIMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

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

ITA 235/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.235/Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri T. Hunar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 44A

TDS provisions, details of payments of tax, cess, duty, fees, compliance with provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, maintenance of inventory records etc. The appellant would accordingly get a relief of 3% of the net profit rate. Thus, out of the total addition of Rs.15,67,258/-, an addition of Rs.896459/- (i.e. 5% of Rs.2,23

SHRI LIKHA SAAYA,NIRJILI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- NORTH LAKHIMPUR., LAKHIMPUR.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 49/GTY/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumarand Manmohan Dasita Nos.49 & 50/Gty/2021 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Likha Saaya S/O. Shri Likha Vs. Ito, Ward-North, Lakhimpur Heli, P-Sector, P.O. Nirjuli, Borah Complex, D.K.Road, North District Papumpare, Arunachal Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, Assam- Pradesh-791109 787001 Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Sarala Agarwal. Ar Revenue By : Shri Kausik Ray, Jcit

For Appellant: Sarala Agarwal. ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

TDS certificate. The Assessing Officer also noted that the income of the assessee is exempt from tax on the ground of being a Member of Scheduled Tribe of Arunachal Pradesh. The Assessing Officer also estimated the transport income out of total transport contract receipts, at Rs.1,34,40,000/- after deducting all expenses by applying flat rate of 10%, which

SHRI LIKHA SAAYA,NIRJILI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- NORTH LAKHIMPUR., LAKHIMPUR.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 50/GTY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumarand Manmohan Dasita Nos.49 & 50/Gty/2021 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Likha Saaya S/O. Shri Likha Vs. Ito, Ward-North, Lakhimpur Heli, P-Sector, P.O. Nirjuli, Borah Complex, D.K.Road, North District Papumpare, Arunachal Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, Assam- Pradesh-791109 787001 Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Sarala Agarwal. Ar Revenue By : Shri Kausik Ray, Jcit

For Appellant: Sarala Agarwal. ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, JCIT
Section 10(26)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

TDS certificate. The Assessing Officer also noted that the income of the assessee is exempt from tax on the ground of being a Member of Scheduled Tribe of Arunachal Pradesh. The Assessing Officer also estimated the transport income out of total transport contract receipts, at Rs.1,34,40,000/- after deducting all expenses by applying flat rate of 10%, which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati03 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153C

23. Though before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed a very detailed submission on this point also and relied upon a large number of decisions starting from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO, Calcutta & Ors –vs.- Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 40/GTY/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati03 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153C

23. Though before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed a very detailed submission on this point also and relied upon a large number of decisions starting from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO, Calcutta & Ors –vs.- Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 45/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 263

23. The ITAT in the case of Mrs. Khatiza S. Oomerbhoy vs. ITO, Mumbai, 101 TTJ 1095, analyzed in detail various authoritative pronouncements including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industries 243 ITR 83 and has propounded the following broader principle to judge the action of CIT taken under section

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD.,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 418/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 263

23. The ITAT in the case of Mrs. Khatiza S. Oomerbhoy vs. ITO, Mumbai, 101 TTJ 1095, analyzed in detail various authoritative pronouncements including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industries 243 ITR 83 and has propounded the following broader principle to judge the action of CIT taken under section

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 31/GTY/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,AGARTALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - UDAIPUR , AGARTALA

ITA 243/GTY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 30/GTY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 32/GTY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,TRIPURA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 63/GTY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention

TRIPURA STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED ,AGARTALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 167/GTY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 154

TDS involving the former two claims as on 04.04.2008 and 12.05.2008 i.e. in next financial year 2008-09 respectively. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh necessary factual verification as per law. 13. Coming to the third issue of Administrative Staff College of India donation, Mr. Bhardwaj invited our attention