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.

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 206Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi66Mumbai40Telangana14Ahmedabad14Jaipur12Kolkata9Indore7Chandigarh4Guwahati4Bangalore3Varanasi2Nagpur2Raipur2Chennai2Cochin2Hyderabad2Jodhpur1Rajkot1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)23Section 153A12Section 686Addition to Income5Section 143(2)4Section 1323Section 132(4)3Section 142(1)3Section 133(6)2Bogus Purchases

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

section 206C(4) and submitted that the term “behalf of whom the amount is collected and paid to the Government” means that the credit be allowed to the person who has actually carried out transaction the on which tax was collected at source. Further Ld. Sr. counsel has pointed out that since the disallowance

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 2023
2
Penalty2
Disallowance2
AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(1)Section 234B

section 206C(4) and submitted that the term “behalf of whom the amount is collected and paid to the Government” means that the credit be allowed to the person who has actually carried out transaction the on which tax was collected at source. Further Ld. Sr. counsel has pointed out that since the disallowance

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

disallowance. These two grounds of the Revenue are accordingly rejected. 35. Ground No.14 & 15: Issue raised in these two grounds relates to share of profits of Rs.25,56,208/- from partnership firm “Rohit International” treated the same as “unexplained”. These two grounds read as under: 14. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

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

disallowance. These two grounds of the Revenue are accordingly rejected. 35. Ground No.14 & 15: Issue raised in these two grounds relates to share of profits of Rs.25,56,208/- from partnership firm “Rohit International” treated the same as “unexplained”. These two grounds read as under: 14. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

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

disallowance. These two grounds of the Revenue are accordingly rejected. 35. Ground No.14 & 15: Issue raised in these two grounds relates to share of profits of Rs.25,56,208/- from partnership firm “Rohit International” treated the same as “unexplained”. These two grounds read as under: 14. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER -4(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. HAMID HUSAIN, BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 796/IND/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 270A

sections": [ "143(3)", "144B", "143(2)", "142(1)", "270A", "46A", "139(1)", "206C", "133(6)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance of 100% of purchases

HAMID HUSAIN,BHOPAL vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 115/IND/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiito-4(1), Hamid Husain, बनाम/ Bhopal 369, Kaji Camp, Vs. Gali No.3, Near Sindhi Colony, Berasia Road, Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Hamid Husain, Assessment Unit, बनाम/ 369, Kaji Camp, Income Tax Department Vs. Gali No.3, Near Sindhi Colony, Berasia Road, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270A

section 139(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961. Further, all parties have collected ‘TCS’ u/s 206C of Income-tax Act, 1961 on scrap purchased by assessee from them. The ‘TCS’ so collected is mentioned in their invoices and deposited to Income-tax Department for which the assessee claimed credit against tax liability also. Hence, all parties are in the mainstream