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.

16 results for “TDS”+ Section 12A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi163Mumbai100Bangalore85Kolkata32Lucknow29Ahmedabad29Pune28Jaipur18Hyderabad16Chennai16Chandigarh15Indore13Visakhapatnam13Rajkot6Amritsar6Agra5Varanasi4Jodhpur3Karnataka3Telangana3Allahabad3Surat2Dehradun2Raipur1Rajasthan1Cochin1Jabalpur1Guwahati1Panaji1Nagpur1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 1053TDS12Section 1110Section 143(3)9Disallowance9Section 12A8Addition to Income8Section 234E7Exemption7Section 201(1)

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1237/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23
For Appellant: \nShri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: \nShri K. Vinoth Kannan
Section 154Section 200Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250Section 311

TDS\nstatements and remitted the tax deducted at source within the prescribed time\nlimits, therefore, there was no infirmity in levy of interest under section 220(2)\nof Act by the CPC.\n13.\nAccordingly, the CIT(A), based on his aforesaid observations, dismissed\nthe appeal.\n14.\nAggrieved, the assessee company has carried the matter in appeal\nbefore

6
Penalty6
Survey u/s 133A6

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee company, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

ITA 1236/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1236 & 1237/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 & 2022-23) Vivimed Labs Limited, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3(4), Pan: Aaacv6060A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 05/01/2026 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan
Section 154Section 200Section 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250Section 311

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. We concur with the observations of the CIT(A) that

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 92CSection 92E

TDS to the tune of Rs. 30,211/- without assigning any reasons therefor. 10. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds during the course of hearing.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company is engaged in manufacturing of Clinker and Ordinary Portland Cement. The assessee, being the third largest cement

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CONSTRUCTION,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 445/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri C.S.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Goutam, DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 80G

TDS compared to the claim in the return of income. The Appellant craves leave to, add to, amend to or modify the above grounds of appeal either before or during the hearings of the appeal, as permitted by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal). STATEMENT OF FACTS The assessee is a charitable entity registered under Section 12A as well

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1500/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 943/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 944/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1412/HYD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1501/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. GAYATRI PROJECTS LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1413/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. S.Praveena, DR
Section 143(3)

TDS was made on such amounts. During the asst. proceedings, only self-made Vouchers were shown to have been produced and some of the amounts were also used for payment as expenses against public policy such as penalty, gratuitous payments etc. For the said reasons the AO disallowed the entire a mounts of Rs. 15,83,00,000/-, treating

SHILPARAMAM ARTS, CRAFTS AND CULTURAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1(1) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 547/HYD/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Raja Kumar, DR
Section 12ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

2. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee, M/s. Shilparamam Arts Crafts and Cultural Society is a registered Government Society under the provisions of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) and working under Youth Advancement Tourism and Culture Department (YAT & C), Government of Telangana State. Assessee society was established with the objects

AURORA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,HYDERABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 318/HYD/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12A

12A and 10(23C)(vi) which is bad in law. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 318, 319, 320 & 321/Hyd/2020 3.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Pr.CIT has erred in cancelling the approval made u/s.10(23C) of the Act., with effect from 2009 (date of original sanction of approval), while the show casue notices mentioned only some points

TARAKARAMA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,HYDERABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 321/HYD/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12A

12A and 10(23C)(vi) which is bad in law. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 318, 319, 320 & 321/Hyd/2020 3.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Pr.CIT has erred in cancelling the approval made u/s.10(23C) of the Act., with effect from 2009 (date of original sanction of approval), while the show casue notices mentioned only some points

CHURCH EDUCATINAL SOCIETY ,HYDERABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 319/HYD/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12A

12A and 10(23C)(vi) which is bad in law. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 318, 319, 320 & 321/Hyd/2020 3.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Pr.CIT has erred in cancelling the approval made u/s.10(23C) of the Act., with effect from 2009 (date of original sanction of approval), while the show casue notices mentioned only some points

KARSHAK VIDYA PARISHAD ,HYDERABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 320/HYD/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12A

12A and 10(23C)(vi) which is bad in law. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 318, 319, 320 & 321/Hyd/2020 3.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Pr.CIT has erred in cancelling the approval made u/s.10(23C) of the Act., with effect from 2009 (date of original sanction of approval), while the show casue notices mentioned only some points

SWARNA EDUCATIONAL ACADEMY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 713/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Darshan JakhariaFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 13ASection 13BSection 143(1)Section 250

TDS and had filed return in Form Type 7 and has not claimed any deduction exemptions under section 11 or clauses of Section 10 or Section 13A or Section 13B in schedule Part B-TI of the return. In response to the same, the assessee filed return of income on 21.5.2019 correcting the defect declaring the income at Rs.1