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.

252 results for “TDS”+ Section 10(25)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,754Delhi2,739Bangalore1,511Chennai1,004Kolkata615Hyderabad405Pune364Ahmedabad356Indore252Jaipur251Raipur223Chandigarh221Karnataka191Cochin191Surat108Nagpur95Rajkot73Lucknow72Visakhapatnam69Cuttack65Amritsar44Dehradun40Jodhpur37Guwahati36Ranchi35Allahabad25Agra24Telangana24Panaji21Patna19SC12Jabalpur11Varanasi9Kerala9Calcutta6Rajasthan4Uttarakhand2Himachal Pradesh1Orissa1Bombay1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)88Section 201(1)82Section 194H53Addition to Income47Section 26345TDS43Section 6838Disallowance36Section 40A(3)31Section 234E

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 the Revenue could

Showing 1–20 of 252 · Page 1 of 13

...
27
Section 14727
Deduction16

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 the Revenue could

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)

25-26) In this case, assessee company incurred certain\nbusiness expenditure which was shown as prior-period expenditure in its balance\nsheet for AY 2003-04. However, said expenditure pertained to AY 2001-02.\nAssessee did not raise said issue before AO/ CIT(A) for the AY 2001-02. The said\nissue was raised before the Hon'ble ITAT

PERMALI WALLACE PVT. LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

ITA 552/IND/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 195Section 195rSection 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

10,25,380/- at S.No. 3 of Table in Para 9, Page 42 of the order of FY 2015-16 (AY 2016-17). This has resulted in double consideration of same transaction. Further, the correct amount of remittance is Rs. 9,03,204/- which ought to be considered. 7. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the additional issues/grounds

PERMALI WALLACE PVT. LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

ITA 550/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Nov 2023

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

Section 195Section 195rSection 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

10,25,380/- at S.No. 3 of Table in Para 9, Page 42 of the order of FY 2015-16 (AY 2016-17). This has resulted in double consideration of same transaction. Further, the correct amount of remittance is Rs. 9,03,204/- which ought to be considered. 7. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the additional issues/grounds

PERMALI WALLACE PVT. LTD,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

ITA 551/IND/2018[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Nov 2023

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

Section 195Section 195rSection 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

10,25,380/- at S.No. 3 of Table in Para 9, Page 42 of the order of FY 2015-16 (AY 2016-17). This has resulted in double consideration of same transaction. Further, the correct amount of remittance is Rs. 9,03,204/- which ought to be considered. 7. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the additional issues/grounds

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 109/IND/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

10,18,92,350/-. Respectfully following above judicial precedents, we hold that these charges are not fees for rendering any technical services as envisaged in Section 194J of the Act. Therefore, we reverse the order of the ld CIT(A) and assessee’s appeal is allowed on this ground also. It is contended that the facts, circumstances and issues

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 110/IND/2015[2013-14 (for first three quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

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

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

10,18,92,350/-. Respectfully following above judicial precedents, we hold that these charges are not fees for rendering any technical services as envisaged in Section 194J of the Act. Therefore, we reverse the order of the ld CIT(A) and assessee’s appeal is allowed on this ground also. It is contended that the facts, circumstances and issues

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (TDS), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 111/IND/2015[2013-14 (Quarter 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Aug 2024

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

Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

10,18,92,350/-. Respectfully following above judicial precedents, we hold that these charges are not fees for rendering any technical services as envisaged in Section 194J of the Act. Therefore, we reverse the order of the ld CIT(A) and assessee’s appeal is allowed on this ground also. It is contended that the facts, circumstances and issues

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE CIT (TDS), BHOPAL

ITA 415/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

TDS was deductible by M/s. Bharti Cellular Limited when it paid interconnect charges/access/port charges to BSNL? For that purpose, we are required to examine the meaning of the words "fees for technical services" under Section 194J read with clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [`Act', for short] which, inter alia, states that

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCIT TDS, INDORE

ITA 265/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Cit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Bhopal Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd. Dcit/Jcit (Tds), बनाम/ (Formerly M/S Idea Indore Vs. Cellular Ltd.), 139-140, Electronics Complex, Pardeshipura, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 263

TDS was deductible by M/s. Bharti Cellular Limited when it paid interconnect charges/access/port charges to BSNL? For that purpose, we are required to examine the meaning of the words "fees for technical services" under Section 194J read with clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [`Act', for short] which, inter alia, states that

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)

10(23C)(vi) was allowed by the Hon'ble Chef Commissioner of Income tax Indore vide order dated 25.06.2009. 3.2 The appellant has submitted that with a view to provide free medical aid to the poor and down trodden, it had constructed a medical college and a large hospital on Nemawar Road approx 25 kilometres away from Indore

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)

10(23C)(vi) was allowed by the Hon'ble Chef Commissioner of Income tax Indore vide order dated 25.06.2009. 3.2 The appellant has submitted that with a view to provide free medical aid to the poor and down trodden, it had constructed a medical college and a large hospital on Nemawar Road approx 25 kilometres away from Indore

JCIT(OSD),-2(1),INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 441/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

10 Kgs. to 30 Kgs. The conversion of Kgs into Bars would come to approx. 132 bars and the profit would come @ Rs.800/- per Bar to approx. Rs.1,05,600/-. The assessee has shown the gross profit ofRs.11,50,370/-. Thus, the assessee has shown more profit than estimated by the learned Assessing Officer. Complete details of purchases and sales

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 309/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

10 Kgs. to 30 Kgs. The conversion of Kgs into Bars would come to approx. 132 bars and the profit would come @ Rs.800/- per Bar to approx. Rs.1,05,600/-. The assessee has shown the gross profit ofRs.11,50,370/-. Thus, the assessee has shown more profit than estimated by the learned Assessing Officer. Complete details of purchases and sales

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 244/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

10 Kgs. to 30 Kgs. The conversion of Kgs into Bars would come to approx. 132 bars and the profit would come @ Rs.800/- per Bar to approx. Rs.1,05,600/-. The assessee has shown the gross profit ofRs.11,50,370/-. Thus, the assessee has shown more profit than estimated by the learned Assessing Officer. Complete details of purchases and sales

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

ITA 67/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

25,00,000 27,00,000 5,19,998 8. Sanskriti Vintrade Pvt. SVPL - 1,49,178 4,75,000 Ltd. 50,00,000 - 5,00,002 9. SHP Financial Services SFSPL 1,81,505 1,60,397 5,72,158 Pvt. Ltd. 50,00,000 28,50,000 7,85,000 10. Amber Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. AVPL

DCIT , CENTRAL -2 , INDORE vs. M/S GREAT GALLEON VENTURES LTD , INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

ITA 68/IND/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

25,00,000 27,00,000 5,19,998 8. Sanskriti Vintrade Pvt. SVPL - 1,49,178 4,75,000 Ltd. 50,00,000 - 5,00,002 9. SHP Financial Services SFSPL 1,81,505 1,60,397 5,72,158 Pvt. Ltd. 50,00,000 28,50,000 7,85,000 10. Amber Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. AVPL

THE DCIT,1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. RITSPIN SYNTHETICS LTD., PITHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms indicated above, and the cross-objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 213/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Agarwal, C.A. and Shri Pankaj Mogra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 68

10,00,000/- made under section 68 was not sustainable and deleted the same. Consequent to the deletion of the principal addition, the learned CIT(A) further held that the disallowance of interest of ₹25,27,261/- under section 69C of the Act could not survive, ITA No. 213/Ind/2023 & C.O. 4/Ind/2024 ACIT vs. M/s. Ritspin Synthetic Pvt. Ltd. & M/s. Ritspin

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 513/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

TDS) under section 154/201(1)/201(1A), levying interest under section 220(2). 2.The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming that interest under section 220(2) is levied on a calendar month basis instead of number of days (30 or 31, as the case may be): 2.1.Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating