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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi102Chandigarh99Mumbai76Cochin61Ahmedabad39Chennai26Bangalore23Hyderabad18Pune8Kolkata8Jaipur6Rajkot4Cuttack3Surat3Karnataka2Lucknow1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 4019Section 143(3)5Section 285Section 43B5TDS5Section 684Addition to Income4Survey u/s 133A4Disallowance4Section 10(37)

M/S SHRI SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 279/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

section 145A r.w.s 43B the disallowance made by the AO is in accordance with the law and the decision relied upon are not applicable in the facts of the case. 17. We have heard the rival contentions, submissions and decisions relied upon by both the parties to drive home to their contentions. As the issue before us is revolving between

3
Section 36(1)(va)3
Section 145(3)3

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 1/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

section 145A r.w.s 43B the disallowance made by the AO is in accordance with the law and the decision relied upon are not applicable in the facts of the case. 17. We have heard the rival contentions, submissions and decisions relied upon by both the parties to drive home to their contentions. As the issue before us is revolving between

SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK INDUCTION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 116/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

section 145A r.w.s 43B the disallowance made by the AO is in accordance with the law and the decision relied upon are not applicable in the facts of the case. 17. We have heard the rival contentions, submissions and decisions relied upon by both the parties to drive home to their contentions. As the issue before us is revolving between

KRISHAN PAL SINGH HUF,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1268/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

145A and insertion of clause (iii) in section 56 (2) would not be applicable on same. 9 Krishan Pal Singh vs. ITO 2. [2018] 96 taxmann.com 541 (Bangalore – Trib.) \ [2018] 172 ITD 332 (Bangalore – Trib.) [20-07-2018] In re : Income Tax Officer Vs Sangappa S. Kudarikannur : (See Par 14) : Interest awarded to assessee U/s 28 of Land Acquisition

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1121/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, Ld. CIT a
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

TDS and to introduce the unaccounted money through bogus sales. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the retail showroom at Jodhpur is approximately 1600 sq. feet in size and it is spread over three stories and there are approximately 9 to 10 employees besides the MOU correspondence. It has also been submitted that there is one billing counter

FAREED ANWAR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 825/JPR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201oSection 40Section 43B

TDS. The relevant finding are contained in para 15 of its order which are reproduced as under:- “ We approve the aforesaid view as well. As a fortiorari, it follows that Section 40(a)(ia) covers not only those cases where the amount is payable but also when it is paid. In this behalf, one has to keep in mind