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.

562 results for “TDS”+ Section 10(10)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,118Delhi5,037Bangalore2,464Chennai1,905Kolkata1,356Pune958Hyderabad741Ahmedabad666Indore562Jaipur460Cochin441Raipur418Chandigarh344Karnataka326Nagpur280Surat235Visakhapatnam205Rajkot158Lucknow151Amritsar113Cuttack107Jodhpur84Dehradun84Ranchi68Patna66Panaji64Jabalpur61Agra58Guwahati55Telangana49Allahabad36SC22Varanasi19Kerala15Calcutta13Himachal Pradesh8Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana4Orissa3J&K3Uttarakhand3Gauhati1Bombay1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 200A84Section 143(3)75Section 234E65Section 201(1)63TDS50Addition to Income48Section 194H46Section 6845Section 26342Section 201

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-II, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S AGRAWAL CONSTRUCTION CO., BHOPAL

ITA 590/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing It(Ss)A Nos.233 To 238/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2006-07 To 2011-12 M/S. Agrawal Construction Co. Acit, 1(1) बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaefa8225H It(Ss)A No.224 To 226/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 To 2011-12 Acit, 1(1) M/S. Agrawal Construction बनाम/ Bhopal Co. Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaefa8225H Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 801Section 80I

section. The appellant has made claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) wherein, the permission certificate and completion certificate from the local authority have been obtained within cutoff date which is the most basis requirement to claim deduction u/s 80IB(10). 16. We have considered rival contentions and gone through the material available on record. We find that

Showing 1–20 of 562 · Page 1 of 29

...
39
Deduction33
Disallowance32

M/S AGARWAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ,BHOPAL vs. DYPTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ITA 596/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing It(Ss)A Nos.233 To 238/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2006-07 To 2011-12 M/S. Agrawal Construction Co. Acit, 1(1) बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaefa8225H It(Ss)A No.224 To 226/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 To 2011-12 Acit, 1(1) M/S. Agrawal Construction बनाम/ Bhopal Co. Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaefa8225H Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 801Section 80I

section. The appellant has made claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) wherein, the permission certificate and completion certificate from the local authority have been obtained within cutoff date which is the most basis requirement to claim deduction u/s 80IB(10). 16. We have considered rival contentions and gone through the material available on record. We find that

NARENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 233/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 253(5)

10(10C) of the Act and also rebate under\nSection 89 of the Act in respect of the amount received in excess of Rs. 5,00,000 on account\nof voluntary retirement. But BSNL authorities refused to allow the rebate under Section 89 of\nthe IT Act and recovered TDS

D.K CONSTRUCTION,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2 (3), BHOPAL

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

ITA 23/IND/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanid. K Construction Ito 2(3) E 2/21, Pandit Deeendayal Bhopal Complex, Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaafd7121P Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09 .09.2024

Section 158A(1)Section 256Section 257Section 261Section 801B(10)Section 80I

TDS.” 2. At the time of hearing Ld. AR of the assesse has stated at bar that due to smallness of disallowance the assessee does not press ground no.2 of the grounds of appeal and the same may be dismissed as not pressed. Ld. DR has raised no objection if ground no.2 of the assesse’s appeal is dismissed

M/S. ARIHANT CHERITABLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE ITO (TDS)-1, INDORE

In the result, we find no force in the ground of the Revenue, hence dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2015-16

Section 133ASection 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

section 133A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on the premises of the appellant on 15-05-2014 to verify the TDS compliances. A.3] During the course of TDS Survey proceedings, the assessing officer opined that the appellant was liable to deduct TDS at the rate of 10% 3 Arihand

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 917/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

10. The ld. DR submitted that a harmonious and conjoint reading of provisions of section 234E & Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2012, Section 271H, section 200 A(1)(c), Memorandum to Finance Bill 2015 and the case-laws on this issue makes following points unambiguously clear that: (a) The fee payable u/s 234E is a charging provision

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 914/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

10. The ld. DR submitted that a harmonious and conjoint reading of provisions of section 234E & Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2012, Section 271H, section 200 A(1)(c), Memorandum to Finance Bill 2015 and the case-laws on this issue makes following points unambiguously clear that: (a) The fee payable u/s 234E is a charging provision

AJAY AGARKAR,UJJAIN vs. CIT(A), MADHYA PRADESH

The appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 337/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2018-19 Ajay Aagarkar Nfac House No.4, Kalpataru Delhi Avenue, Dewas Road, Near बनाम/ Rukmani Motors Vs. Ujjain (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abhpa2638L Assessee By Ms. Ruchira Nerkar, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement .01.2025

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

10(10AA) of the Act 61 and the amount of leave salary drawn by the assessee on or after the date of absorption in BSNL ( being PSU ) will be taxable , subjected to the exemption limit of Rs.3 lakhs as per clause (ii) of the aforesaid section. 3.4 In support of his contention he relied on an internal instruction issued

BMG CALCUTTAWALA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. AO CPC (TDS), ITO TDS(1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed\"

ITA 136/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246ASection 250Section 253

Section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015\nthat the revenue got mandate in law to create a demand of late\nfee. We therefore hold that late fee cannot be imposed u/s\n200A/234E of the Act as at material time and place i.e. filing of\nstatements of TDS in Form 24Q for the assessment Year 2013-14\nthere was no provision in law. This

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 385/IND/2022[2015-16 Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 383/IND/2022[20147-15 Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 382/IND/2022[2014-14Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 378/IND/2022[2013-14 Q-1]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 387/IND/2022[2015-16-Q4]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 386/IND/2022[2015-16 Q-3]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 381/IND/2022[2013-14-Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 384/IND/2022[2015-16- Q-1]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 379/IND/2022[2013-2014-Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

M/S. STAR DELTA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO ( TDS) -2, BHOPAL

The appeals are allowed

ITA 380/IND/2022[2013-14Q-3]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201b

TDS) does not arise in the present case as there is no income per se and taxability of income per se in the present scenario. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the notifications issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein both these institutes have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Clause 2 of sub-Section

DISTT WOMAN & CHILD DEV OFFICER VIDISHA,VIDISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-2), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 252/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 4

Section 194C. 9. The Learned Assessing Officer failed to appreciate that the appellant acted in good faith and complied with all procedural 9 requirements under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The reasons provided by the Learned Assessing Officer for the imposition of TDS are arbitrary, unjustified, and legally flawed. 10. That