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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Section 144B(1)(xvi)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi10Mumbai9Chandigarh9Jaipur5Hyderabad2Visakhapatnam1Bangalore1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 4384Section 143(3)2Section 144B2Section 2502Section 143(2)2Section 142(1)2Section 43B2Deduction2TDS2Addition to Income

MAGNAQUEST TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.736/Hyd

ITA 736/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, G Srinivasa RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 438Section 43B

144B(xvi)(b) of the Act and hence the impugned assessment order is liable to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in not allowing the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s 438 of the Act to the extent

2

MAGNAQUEST TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, ITA.No.736/Hyd

ITA 743/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, G Srinivasa RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 438Section 43B

144B(xvi)(b) of the Act and hence the impugned assessment order is liable to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in not allowing the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s 438 of the Act to the extent