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.

17 results for “TDS”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi197Mumbai195Ahmedabad67Cochin58Jaipur47Bangalore46Chennai45Hyderabad23Surat23Kolkata23Chandigarh20Rajkot19Agra17Indore17Pune15Lucknow14Raipur11Cuttack11Amritsar10Patna9Visakhapatnam7Guwahati7Nagpur6Varanasi3Jabalpur2Dehradun2Allahabad1Calcutta1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)27Section 153A20Addition to Income14Section 69A13Section 6812Section 142(1)11Section 14810Section 143(2)8Section 1328Cash Deposit

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

Section 69A belongs to his wife and son's sole\nproprietary firm (supra). Money is collected in cash from debtors\nof sole proprietary firm's and are deposited in his saving bank\naccount of SBI & HDFC and then transferred to sole proprietary\nfirm accounts. No TDS

JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA,KHANDWA vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE

ITA 226/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore
5
Revision u/s 2632
TDS2
18 Sept 2024
AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 153ASection 69

TDS on such expenses and has failed to do so ? b) Without prejudice to the above, additional evidence was admitted without giving adequate opportunity to the AO ? c) Without prejudice to the above, there is non-compliance of section 194C(7) of the Income-tax Act by the assessee since the assessee failed to furnish, to the prescribed income

THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE vs. JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA, KHANDWA

ITA 228/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 153ASection 69

TDS on such expenses and has failed to do so ? b) Without prejudice to the above, additional evidence was admitted without giving adequate opportunity to the AO ? c) Without prejudice to the above, there is non-compliance of section 194C(7) of the Income-tax Act by the assessee since the assessee failed to furnish, to the prescribed income

SURESH KUMAR,MANAS BHAWAN, RNT MARG, INDORE vs. ITO, BURHANPUR, INDORE

In the result we are of the considered

ITA 369/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Kumar, Ito –Burhanpur. बनाम/ 112, Manas Bhawan, Vs. 11 Rnt Marg, Indore (Pan: Eekps7728B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bumb, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date Of 22.01.2026 Pronouncement आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 69A

Section 69A of the Act. The Appellant prays that the said addition be directed to be deleted. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add amend any or all grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. Record of Hearing 3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 13.01.2026 when the Ld. AR for & on behalf

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

69A e) Applicability of Section 115BBE in respect of additions made in A.Y. 2017-18 and A.Y. 2018-19 5. Since the common issues are involved in various assessment years, it would be appropriate to adjudicate the various grounds taken by the assessee and the revenue in their cross-appeals for the subject assessment years, through this common Order

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

69A e) Applicability of Section 115BBE in respect of additions made in A.Y. 2017-18 and A.Y. 2018-19 5. Since the common issues are involved in various assessment years, it would be appropriate to adjudicate the various grounds taken by the assessee and the revenue in their cross-appeals for the subject assessment years, through this common Order

VAIBHAV MITTAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT 4(1),IND, INDORE

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 582/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 69A

TDS as reflected in 26AS. However, no specific discussion\nwas made on the additions made in the base order dated 25/11/2019 i.e. no\nrelief was granted by the AO on the addition made as matter not a mistake\napparent from records.\nLater on, appellant had filed an appeal before the CIT(A) on 25/09/2021\nagainst rectification order dated 01/09/2021

M/S. ABHINAV ENTERPRISES,INDORE vs. PCIT-2, INDORE, INDORE

ITA 339/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Abhinav Enterprises, Pr. Commissioner Of 85, Income-Tax-2, Ramchandra Nagar Extn., Indore. बनाम/ Aerodrum Road, Vs. Indore. (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan : Aanfa6300Q Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11.03.2024

Section 143(3)Section 263

TDS are attached. Comparative details of Trading and profit and loss account with last two years is also attached herewith. Regarding filing of duly confirmed copy of accounts of sundry creditors 9. and advance received against sales/services in excess of Rs. 2,00,000/- with a chart showing PAN, Addresses and the balances in the account of each such creditors

SHRI KHALID AMAN,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ITA 225/IND/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Khalid Aman, Pr. Cit-2 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aarpa 4443 L Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 17.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2023

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

TDS was a concern of M/s Bharti Airtel who paid rent to the assessee, and not a concern of assessee. Hence there is no justification on the part of Ld. PCIT to involve this issue in revisionary-action. 9. Clearly therefore, the Ld. AR contended, the assessee had filed all details / documents during the course of assessmentqua Issue

KUSUMLATA GARG,INDORE vs. DCIT ACIT 3 (1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 298/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

TDS was made by tenant\nto make the compliance of income-tax provisions but the fact is such that\nthe tenant is not paying rent to assessee. He submitted that as per\nExplanation to section 23(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961, the amount of\nunrealized rent is not taxable if the conditions prescribed in Rule 4 of\nIncome

HUSAIN KOHAWALA,KUKSHI DISTT. DHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL, NFAC

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 222/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanihusain Kohawala, Cit (A), Saifiya Marg Bohra Mohalla, Nfac, Near Macchi Darwaza, Delhi Kukshi, Vs. Dhar (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bkrpk6392P Assessee By Shri Parag Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11.10.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 69A

section 143(3) making addition us 69A as unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 7416206 (All Credits including Transfers are considered as cash deposits). The Total addition was made considering two Bank Account i.e. SBI- Alirajpur Branch (Addition of Rs. 6348785) and SBI- Anandganj Mandi Branch (Addition of Rs. 1067421). 2. CIT(A) while making his observation regarding the Grounds

JAGDISH SOLANKI ,JHABUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER JHABUA, JHABUA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 169/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

69A of the Act.\n5. 2. In ground no. 1 & 2 of the appeal, the appellant has challenged the legality of the impugned assessment order and strongly contended against reopening of the case u/s 147 and issuance of notice u/s 148. The appellant has claimed that no Income was escaped assessment, hence the reasons recorded by the AO and insufficient

DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S GLOBUS MEGA PROJECT PVT. LTD, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and C

ITA 577/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore08 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Fadnis, A.R
Section 132Section 142ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 40Section 69C

TDS to Aquarius Inc. Bhopal. Therefore the entire disallowance is liable to be deleted. 8.3. Regarding third ground of appeal, the ld. A.R. taken us to page nos. 135 to 190 of the Paper Book wherein the ledger account of labour charges, various bills and vouchers and muster roll of the labourer’s record were produced. After verification

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

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

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

69A of the Act. However specifically with regard to the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- and Rs.3,00,00,000/- made for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15 the same is purely based on the statement given on 9 Alankar Jewellers ITANo.838/Ind/2019& IT(SS)No.205/Ind/2019 oath u/s 132(4) of the Act by the authorised representative on behalf