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”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad44Mumbai40Jaipur29Delhi27Bangalore25Chennai23Agra17Ahmedabad16Cuttack14Kolkata13Surat13Jodhpur11Lucknow9Raipur8Pune7Chandigarh7Amritsar7Indore5Patna5Visakhapatnam3Rajkot3Guwahati2Allahabad2Dehradun1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 153C96Section 143(3)52Cash Deposit37Addition to Income37Disallowance29Section 6828Search & Seizure27Limitation/Time-bar20Demonetization16Section 147

BLUOAK AGRO COMMODITIES LIMITED,MEDAK vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 277/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 277/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bluoak Agro Income Tax Officer, Commodities Limited, Vs. Ward-1(3), Sadasivpet, Hyderabad Medak District [Pan No. Aaaco7864M]

For Appellant: Shri R.V. Subramanyam and Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARs for Shri N. Narasimha RaoFor Respondent: Ms. P. Sumitha, DR
Section 115J

demonetization period as compared to the pre-demonetisation period and also that the assessee did not affect TDS on the rent

MB AKKAIAH AND COMPANY,MIRYALGUDA vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

15
Section 26312
Section 14811
ITA 1133/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed
ITAT Hyderabad
10 Sept 2025
AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

demonetization period, puchases and sales made during the financial year 2016-2017 relevant to assessment year 2017-2018 under consideration. The Assessing Officer called for Bank account statements, Cash book, VAT returns, TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SHIVA KUMAR THOTA, WARANGAL

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

demonetization period); (ii) addition of unproved sundry creditors under section 68 of the Act: Rs. 43,43,207/-; (iii) addition of unsecured loan made under section 68 of the Act: Rs.16,19,208/-; (iv) disallowance towards TDS

ABDUL JABBAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD 8(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 519/HYD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Jul 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Momina Alam, ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar, DR

TDS was also directed. Apart from this the assessee also produced an agreement of sale in respect of the cash deposit during the monitoring period and stated that having sold his property, he deposited the sale consideration into bank due to demonetization

GANGADHARAN RENGANATHAN KOMAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 98/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Krishna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 68

demonetization (08.11.2016 to 31.12.2016) out of total deposit of Rs. 6,72,000/- during the relevant year. These payments were made from professional income declared under section 44ADA of Rs.8,66,660/-. The professional income was received from M/s. Heritage Eldercare Services Private Limited and M/s. Swathi Health Care Private Limited through bank transfers after deduction of TDS

SUJATHA KANCHARLA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1233/HYD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri Pawan KumarFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

demonetization period i.e 02.04.2016 to 02.11.2016 from her bank accounts, viz. (i). bank account no. 06422560001820 with HDFC Bank Limited, Branch: Sanjeev Reddy Nagar, Hyderabad; and (ii). bank account no. 56146000328 with State Bank of India, Branch: Nampally. The ld. AR to buttress his aforesaid claim had taken us through a “Chart” which revealed the factual position of cash deposits/withdrawals

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 657/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana, and the Hon'ble High Court

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,SECUNDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 655/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana, and the Hon'ble High Court

NALGONDA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 656/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

demonetization period. 29. The assessee preferred a further appeal before the Tribunal. The ITAT, Hyderabad Bench vide its common order in ITA No.657/Hyd/2020 dated 21-03-2022, set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh examination. The assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana, and the Hon'ble High Court

TAJ SULTANA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-13(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

TDS return and hence the tax deducted was Not showing up in the tax portal. 2) Income from other sources 1. Mortgage loan taken from SBI amounting to Rs. 16,15,000/- was credited to my SB Acct On 21/06/2016 and a copy of confirmation Letter from the SBI Gruhakalpa Branch dated 20-02-2020 & also loan Statement bearing

RAVULA RAVINDER REDDY,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-1, WARANGAL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.171/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Ravula Ravinder Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Warangal Ward – 1 Pan: Bclpr4397F Warangal (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Ms. Vishnu Priya, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, CAFor Respondent: : Ms. Vishnu Priya, DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144

TDS while arriving at total tax payable. 5. The assessing officer erred in arriving at the interest on SB Accounts. 6. The appellant carves leave to add to, amend or modify the above grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal, if it is considered necessary”. 3. The assessee is an individual

SHANKARAIAH TELAKAPALLY,NALGONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, NALGONDA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 655/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Shankaraiah Telakapalli, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 4-10-520/Cs/1, Sainagar Ward – 1, Colony, Ward-24, Nalgonda. Nalgonda, Telangana - 508001. Pan : Alipt1315Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Phanindra, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri T. Venkanna, Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Phanindra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Venkanna, Sr.A.R
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 24Section 69ASection 80CSection 80ESection 80G

TDS credit of Rs.42,656 while computing the income while the same is appearing in Form 26AS of the Appellant.” 3. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 246 days. He has moved a condonation application explaining reasons thereof. I have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given

ASWARTHANARAYANA VENKATA RENIGUNTLA,DHARMAVARAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 143/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Aswarthanarayana Venkata Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Anantapur. Reniguntla, Dharmavaram, Andhra Pradesh. Pan : Alrpr5400R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri M. Chandramouleswara Rao, Ca Revenue By: Sri A. Sitarama Rao. Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.04.2023

For Appellant: Sri M. ChandramouleswaraFor Respondent: Sri A. Sitarama Rao
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 270ASection 271Section 271BSection 274Section 44A

demonetization period, the Assessing Officer had issued notice to the Assessing Officer. After receipt of notice from the Assessing Officer, assessee had submitted that due to technical reasons and glitches, the return of income was not filed, however, the assessee had filed and furnished the copy of audit report, VAT turnover and ledger extracts etc for perusal of the Assessing

KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1330/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1330/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Krishna Constructions The Income Tax Officer, Nirmal. Telangana. Ward-1, Vs. Pin – 504 106. Nirmal – 504 106. Pan Aapfk1280K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

demonetization period and not on the issue of examination of all the credits made in the bank accounts of the assessee. iv. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer ("AO") erred in expanding the scope of "limited scrutiny" of the assessee beyond the examination of "cash deposits", covering additional issues

GOWRI SHANKAR GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 514/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Praveen, DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 294Section 69A

demonetization period had made cash deposits of Rs.35.13 lacs in his bank account No.118001000030501 with Indian Overseas Bank. It was further observed by him that the aforesaid bank 5 Gowri Shankar Gupta account held by the assessee with Indian Overseas Bank was not disclosed by him in the return of income. As the assessee had failed to come forth with

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 52/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 Tax paid u/s 140A 0 Regular Tax Paid 0 TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc = 2,93,41,470/- Balance tax payable Round off 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of assessee after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 51/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 Tax paid u/s 140A 0 Regular Tax Paid 0 TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc = 2,93,41,470/- Balance tax payable Round off 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of assessee after

ACE CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 29/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 Tax paid u/s 140A 0 Regular Tax Paid 0 TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc = 2,93,41,470/- Balance tax payable Round off 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of assessee after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ACE CONSTRUCTIONS , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 50/HYD/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 Tax paid u/s 140A 0 Regular Tax Paid 0 TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc = 2,93,41,470/- Balance tax payable Round off 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of assessee after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(4), HYDERABAD vs. ROYAL ENGINEERING, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 43/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl. आ.अपी.सं / निर्धारणारण वर्ष अपीलार्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / No.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

TDS = 0 Advance tax paid = 0 Tax paid u/s 140A 0 Regular Tax Paid 0 TOTAL TAXES PAID = 0 0 Refund Issued U/s 143(1)/143(3)/154/etc = 2,93,41,470/- Balance tax payable Round off 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of assessee after