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.

202 results for “TDS”+ Business Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,094Delhi4,239Bangalore2,182Chennai1,736Kolkata1,437Hyderabad675Ahmedabad581Pune462Jaipur355Chandigarh282Karnataka277Patna263Surat214Raipur210Cochin207Indore202Nagpur191Visakhapatnam156Rajkot154Lucknow111Cuttack92Amritsar80Jodhpur66Dehradun63Ranchi56Guwahati49Panaji47Agra42Telangana34Allahabad33Jabalpur31SC18Varanasi18Calcutta17Kerala16Himachal Pradesh6J&K3Rajasthan2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1Uttarakhand1Bombay1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 194H91Section 201(1)84Section 143(3)76Section 26361Addition to Income54TDS51Section 271C47Disallowance42Section 6836Section 201

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAJEEV AJMERA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 44A

income in return filed by M. Hence there remained no doubt as to genuineness of payments, has to be allowed. (2) Mali Florex Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 57 SOT 37 Hyd Assessee had incurred expenditure wholly or exclusively for purpose of business must be allowed. Payments made was subjected to TDS

Showing 1–20 of 202 · Page 1 of 11

...
35
Deduction32
Section 40A(3)28

SHRI SURENDRA SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. THE JCIT-3, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 252/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Advocate with Shri Gagan TiwariFor Respondent: 28.09.2022
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 271ASection 271DSection 274Section 41(1)

business in which turnover was exceeding limit of Rs.40 lakhs as prescribed under the provisions of S.44AB of the Act, the date for furnishing return of income under s.139(1) of the Act, for the assessment year under consideration, was falling due on 30-09-2008. However, the appellant furnished his return of income, on 28-09-2008, i.e. before

M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLWER,VIDISHA vs. THE ACIT- II, VIDISHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees in

ITA 838/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2016-17 M/S. Alankar Jewellers Acit-Ii Nikasha Road, Vidisha Bhopal बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D It(Ss)A No.205/Ind/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 Acit-Ii M/S. Alankar Jewellers Bhopal Nikasha Road, Vidisha बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Respondent By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 44ASection 69B

business and the business premises were found vacant. x. There were some discrepancies in the entries appearing in the seized hard disk in comparison with the details submitted on 12.12.2014. With regard to observations made by the AO it was observed that the appellant has been dealing with these supplier from long time and transactions with these suppliers are also

SHRI LAV NARANG,UJJAIN vs. PCIT,, UJJAIN

ITA 166/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40A(3)Section 44A

TDS deducted thereon claimed in the Income Tax Return the FDR’s are part of the business of Civil Construction

MILLION TRADERS BHOPAL P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 124/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(1)Section 234B

TDS and it is in the nature of tax on income which has been collected at source in respect of specified business

MILLION TRADERS BHOPAL P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 125/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(1)Section 234B

TDS and it is in the nature of tax on income which has been collected at source in respect of specified business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 776/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

business which is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust. It is relevant to note that the provisions of section 11(4A) do not override the provisions of section 10 of the Income Tax Act, and as such, profits derived by any trust , institution, association etc. referred to in clauses (21), (23A), (23B), (23BB), (23C), etc. will

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 232/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

business which is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust. It is relevant to note that the provisions of section 11(4A) do not override the provisions of section 10 of the Income Tax Act, and as such, profits derived by any trust , institution, association etc. referred to in clauses (21), (23A), (23B), (23BB), (23C), etc. will

DINESH RAMNANI,NEEMUCH vs. ITO, NEEMUCH

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

ITA 280/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidinesh Ramnani Ito 28, Gayatri Mandir Road Delhi Vs. Neemuch (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aehpr 9729L Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 44A

income amount to Rs 40/0,201 Rable to be deleted. 6.Because alternatively, as stated in preceding Grounds of Appeal serialy numbered 4, the disallowance of commission expenses amounting to s 40,90,292/ is not factually justified in as much as the commission expenses has not been directly paid by the assessee to the sub-dealerts) and becau of this

THE DCIT CIRCLE 5(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S L N MALVIYA INFRA PROJECTS P LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 189/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit, Circle 5(1) M/S. L.N. Malviya Infra Projects Bhopal Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.29, F/F Sector, Dwarka Vs. New Delhi

Section 234ASection 3(3)Section 37(1)

TDS by the assessee would not be an allowable claim of expenditure. Though the same may not fall in the ambit of explanation-1 to section 37(1) of the Act but the said expenditure cannot be regarded as expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assesse. The income

M/S BHOPAL DUGDH SANGH SAHAKARI MY.DAIRY PLANT, BHOPAL vs. DCIT -1 (1) ,BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

ITA 128/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patva, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Amit Soni, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

TDS and therefore paid interest of Rs. 2,13,093/- u/s 201(1A) of the Act to the Income-tax Department. The assessee has debited this interest expenditure to P&L A/c and claimed as business

SMT. SHWETA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-2, INDORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 263

business (being 5,71,856 proprietor of M/s Samarth Impex, Indore) 3 Income from Long Term Capital 27,50,406 Gain (Exempt U/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act 4 Interest on saving Bank Interest 8,715 5 Dividend Income 3,830 3.1] Details of all bank accounts as maintained by the assessee in the year under consideration

CMM KETI JV,INDORE vs. ITO 1(3), INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 73/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Cmm Keti Jv, Income-Tax Officer, 108, Shalimar Corporate 1(3), Center, Indore. बनाम/ 8-B, South Tukoganj, Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aakfc7524K Assessee By Shri Shashank Sharma, Ca & Shri Prakash Gupta, Ca Revenue By Shri Sanjeev H. Bhagat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 270A(9)Section 271BSection 272(1)(d)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

business of civil construction/ infrastructure projects including work-contracts service. For AY 2017-18, the assessee filed return Page 1 of 10 CMM Keti JV, Indore. ITA No. 73/Ind/2024 – AY 2017-18 declaring a total income of Rs. 310/-. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny for the reason of “High Ratio of Refund to TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. PURUSHOTTAM GUPTA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed and\n\"impugned order” is set aside

ITA 278/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

TDS was deducted u/s 194H of the IT Act on payment\nof commission to the assessee from M/s Tarun Trading\nCompany and of M/s Alka Gupta Sales.\n3. The business conducted in the name of M/s Tarun\nTrading Company and of M/s Alka Gupta Sales are all\nfamily run business of the assessee, Shri Purushottam\nGupta and this story

SOM DISTILLERIES PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(3), BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 272/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

TDS which is available with Income-Tax Department. So far the admissibility of deduction of expenditure is concerned, the CIT(A) has rightly held that the expenditure on repair of road within factory premise is a revenue expenditure. Further, there can hardly be any dispute that such expenditure is for business

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I, BHOPAL , BHOPAL vs. SOM DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 289/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

TDS which is available with Income-Tax Department. So far the admissibility of deduction of expenditure is concerned, the CIT(A) has rightly held that the expenditure on repair of road within factory premise is a revenue expenditure. Further, there can hardly be any dispute that such expenditure is for business

THE ACIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. DILIP KUMAR MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN HUF, INDORE

In the result Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 809/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12 Dilip Kumar Mahendra Acit (Central)-1, Vs. Kumar Jain, 6, Near Jagdale School, Indore Janki Nagar, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaehd1394J Revenue By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr.Dr Appellant By Shri Mahesh Agrawal, Adv. Date Of Hearing 05.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement .02.2021 O R D E R

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

income is merely on suspicion, conjectures and surmises. 4.2.2 I have considered the facts of the case, plea raised by the appellant and findings of the AO. The appellant in order to explain modus operandi of the business submitted that the business of financing brokerage is an ancestral business of the appellant. The business was started by Late Shri

SHRI JANKILAL,UJJAIN vs. PCIT-1, INDORE

ITA 175/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jankilal Pr.Cit-1 बनाम/ 12, Chimanganj Mandi Indore Agar Road, Ujjain Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aczpj 2632 A Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 263Section 40Section 80I

TDS has not been made on Security Services payment amounting to Rs. 1,14,433/- made to Sagar Security Services. In submission dated 12th November, 2019, the assessee has stated that as the payee has duly considered this income in return and has paid due taxes thereon, you are not an assessee in default

M/S ROCKBED RENOVATORS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 214/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore12 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirockbed Renovators Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 7-A, Panjabi Bagh Raisen Road Bhopal Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7151G Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 196CSection 263

business of construction/contractor of PWD for construction of Road etc. The assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 31.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.3,41,44,890/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny assessment under e-assessment Scheme of 2019 on the issue of “Verification of Genuineness of Expenses”. The assessment was completed

JHABUA DHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT, RATLAM, RATLAM

ITA 201/IND/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2008-09 Jhabua Dhar Kshetriya Acit/Dcit, Gramin Bank, Ratlam 204, C-21, Business Park, बनाम/ Opp. Hotel Radisson Blu, Mr-10, Vs. Indore

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 40

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Jhabua Dhar Kshetriya ACIT/DCIT, Gramin Bank, Ratlam 204, C-21, Business Park, बनाम/ Opp. Hotel Radisson Blu, MR-10, Vs. Indore (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) PAN: AAAAJ0292Q Assessee by Shri S.S.Deshpande, CA Revenue by Shri Ashish