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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Section 32(1)(ii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,786Mumbai1,686Bangalore948Chennai497Kolkata340Hyderabad254Indore196Karnataka180Ahmedabad180Cochin158Chandigarh152Jaipur139Pune96Raipur96Nagpur58Visakhapatnam58Lucknow50Surat40Rajkot37Cuttack24Guwahati21Patna18Amritsar15Telangana15Dehradun14SC12Kerala9Agra8Jodhpur6Ranchi5Jabalpur2Uttarakhand2Himachal Pradesh1Panaji1Varanasi1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)4Section 40A(3)3Section 133A2Addition to Income2

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)

32,16,251/- to Nirmala Minerals i.e. as per books of accounts also the assessee has paid the royalty of Rs. 6,40,16,251/-. Since there is no difference in the royalty paid as per books of accounts and royalty payment appearing in form no 26AS, hence the addition of Rs. 1 lakh made by the AO is deleted

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR vs. CHETANAYA PROMOTERS AND DEVLOPERS,, JABALPUR

In the result, on this ground, appeal of the Revenue as well as appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 133/JAB/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 292BSection 43C

ii) the disclosure cannot be retracted after a gap of 1 year & 10 months, the view finds support from the decision of Honourable ITAT "A" Bench, Banglore in the case of carpenters Classic (EXIM) Vs. DCIT reported in 108 TTJ 760 & Honourable ITAT "B" Bench, Ahemdabad in the case of DCIT Vs. Bogilal Mulchand Kondoi reported