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.

3 results for “TDS”+ Section 26(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,814Mumbai1,765Bangalore952Chennai573Kolkata378Cochin301Pune261Hyderabad254Ahmedabad207Chandigarh190Karnataka170Jaipur160Raipur150Indore114Surat76Visakhapatnam62Cuttack62Lucknow54Rajkot47Guwahati35Nagpur31Amritsar26Dehradun23Jodhpur16Agra16Telangana16Panaji15Patna11SC11Kerala9Varanasi8Allahabad8Ranchi4Jabalpur3Uttarakhand3Calcutta2Gauhati1Orissa1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)3Addition to Income3Section 43B2TDS2Disallowance2

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-KATNI, KATNI vs. M/S. GAJRAJ MINING PVT. L:TD., SINGRAULI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as assessee is dismissed

ITA 27/JAB/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Gotru, CIT(DR)
Section 2Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

26,03,10,369/ - being disallowance u/s 43B of the I. T. Act, 1961 on account of unpaid service-tax, surcharge and Income Tax deducted at source without appreciating the facts on the basis of which the addition was made by admitting additional evidence without affording adequate opportunity to the Assessing Officer for verification. (iv) Whether on the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. ANAND MINING CORPORATION, JABALPUR

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 104/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

26. Considering the fact that out of professional charges of Rs.79,500/-, no TDS was required to be deducted u/s 194J of the Act on payment of Rs.29,500/- made to three different parties, the learned CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition of Rs.29,500/-, therefore, we find no error or infirmity in the order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA vs. M/S. RAM KUMAR SURESH KUMAR, SATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 136/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gaaleasst. Commissioner Of Vs Shri Ram Kumar Income Tax, Circle-Satna, Suresh Kumar, Satna Birla Road, Satna (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaffr3899D Revenue By Shri Shravan Kumar Gotru, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Rahul Bardia, Fca Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 O R D E R Per Om Prakash Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 12.03.2018 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Jabalpur [In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Raising Following Grounds:

Section 133(6)Section 68

iii) The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on trading of steel items and has several branches throughout the country. The assessee makes most of the purchase of steel items through brokers. In the previous year relevant to assessment year 2013- 14, the assessee has purchased steel item of Rs. 3,57,58,823/- from M/s P.G. Enterprises