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.

18 results for “TDS”+ Section 241clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi244Mumbai195Bangalore186Karnataka85Chandigarh71Hyderabad59Chennai59Kolkata57Jaipur46Ahmedabad40Pune29Raipur20Indore18Cuttack12Visakhapatnam11Surat10Nagpur8Rajkot5Guwahati5Dehradun4Cochin3Lucknow3Telangana3Jodhpur2Allahabad2Ranchi1SC1Calcutta1Patna1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)29Section 143(2)12Section 153A12Addition to Income10Section 687TDS6Section 142(1)4Section 1484Section 2014Section 144C

M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VA TECH HYDRO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 157/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

section 92C (2), it was claimed that the transaction is within tolerance band of +/-5% Margin. 2.6.1. We find that there is no dispute between TPO and the assessee as regards the method, which is CPM and benchmarking based on internal comparable. The only dispute whether the assessee has justified for considering the aggregation of all the projects with

THE ACIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 349/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed
4
Transfer Pricing4
TP Method4
ITAT Indore
28 Feb 2017
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

section 92C (2), it was claimed that the transaction is within tolerance band of +/-5% Margin. 2.6.1. We find that there is no dispute between TPO and the assessee as regards the method, which is CPM and benchmarking based on internal comparable. The only dispute whether the assessee has justified for considering the aggregation of all the projects with

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., RAISEN

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 265/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

section 92C (2), it was claimed that the transaction is within tolerance band of +/-5% Margin. 2.6.1. We find that there is no dispute between TPO and the assessee as regards the method, which is CPM and benchmarking based on internal comparable. The only dispute whether the assessee has justified for considering the aggregation of all the projects with

M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS V A TECH HYDRO INDAI PVT. LTD.),MANDIDEEP vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 316/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

section 92C (2), it was claimed that the transaction is within tolerance band of +/-5% Margin. 2.6.1. We find that there is no dispute between TPO and the assessee as regards the method, which is CPM and benchmarking based on internal comparable. The only dispute whether the assessee has justified for considering the aggregation of all the projects with

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

section 143(3) on 20.08.2015 by AO after making some newer disallowances/additions against which the assessee filed a separate appeal No. U-216/2015-16 to the same CIT(A), Ujjain and the said appeal came to be decided vide a separate order of even date 03.11.2016, copy of order is placed at Page No. 72-79 of Paper-Book

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

ITA 34/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)

TDS under section 195. 13. We notice that to give effect to the order of this Tribunal dated 24.12.2014 proceedings were initiated by ITO (IT&TP), Bhopal in the case of the appellant. As per para 58 of the ITAT's order, it was held by the ITAT that the scope of Section

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD., UNIT SATNA CEMENT WORKS,SATNA vs. ITO (IT & TP), BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeals

ITA 33/IND/2020[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore28 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)

TDS under section 195. 13. We notice that to give effect to the order of this Tribunal dated 24.12.2014 proceedings were initiated by ITO (IT&TP), Bhopal in the case of the appellant. As per para 58 of the ITAT's order, it was held by the ITAT that the scope of Section

M/S. M. P. WARE HOUSING & LOGISTICS CORPORATION,INDORE vs. CIT (TDS), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 491/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12 M.P. Warehousing & Acit (Tds) Logistics Corporation, Vs. Indore Lrt Parisar, Aerodrum Road, Bada Ganapati, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Aadcm7742B Appellant By Shri Rajesh Mehta, Ca Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 26.05.2020

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

TDS Tax Name of Co-owners Share Paid Deductible deducted Sadhana Agrawal 20 65,241/- 6,52,397/- 65,240/- Satishchandra Arya 17 5,54,538/- 55,454/- 55,454/- Aruna Arya 17 5,54,538/- 55,454/- 55,453/- Sandhya Gupta 10 3,26,198/- 32,620/- 32,618/- R.M. Gupta

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

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold and silver

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

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold and silver

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

section 145(3) of the Act. He accordingly reversed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee by holding that the AO was not correct in rejecting the books of accounts. Thereafter, the ld.CIT(A) deleted additions made on account of estimation of gross profit in the transactions of sale of gold and silver

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. SHRI RITESH JAIN, INDORE

ITA 794/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

241 that violation of principle of natural justice (here withholding of back material referred in reasons which is specifically requested for repeatedly) is a serious flaw and results in nullity of the order so passed, which is squarely applicable to present case. Be that as it may, even on merits, for the companies from where assessee recd. share capital assessee

THE DCIT-1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION P. LTD., INDORE

ITA 607/IND/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

241(Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the use of OECD guidelines and stressed that the revenue authorities cannot dictate to an Assessee on how to conduct its business. We find that it has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should

M/S. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT -CIRCLE 1(1), INDORE

ITA 602/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

241(Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the use of OECD guidelines and stressed that the revenue authorities cannot dictate to an Assessee on how to conduct its business. We find that it has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION P LTD., INDORE

ITA 622/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

241(Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the use of OECD guidelines and stressed that the revenue authorities cannot dictate to an Assessee on how to conduct its business. We find that it has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should

M/S. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT RANGE 1(1), INDORE

ITA 601/IND/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

241(Del), wherein the Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the use of OECD guidelines and stressed that the revenue authorities cannot dictate to an Assessee on how to conduct its business. We find that it has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the Assessee as to how he should

MOEBIUS TRADE P LTD, MUMBAI vs. THE ADDITIONAL CIT , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 187/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimoebius Trade Pvt. Ltd. Acit-Ii Resulting Company After Bhopal Merger Of Exotic & Vs. Speciality Fats Pvt. Ltd. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aahcm 4176D Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.12.2023

Section 115BSection 68Section 69CSection 80G

TDS is wrong and bad in law and is prayed to be deleted. 5. That the Learned CIT(A) in effect by dismissal of appeal, erred in not allowing the deduction u/s 80G of Rs. 85,020/- claimed on account of donation paid by the appellant. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SMT. RITU SINGH,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 59/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Ritu Singh Dcit B-110, Habibganj Alkapuri Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Bmips8854D

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

TDS. Further, the A.O. made a lumpsum addition of Rs.2,25,811/- in respect of adhoc [ITA No.59/Ind/2018] [Smt. Ritu Singh, Bhopal] disallowances related to conveyance, printing, stationery and office expenses. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal, thereby the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition