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.

27 results for “TDS”+ Section 482clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi131Mumbai126Bangalore114Chandigarh51Kolkata29Jaipur27Chennai26Ahmedabad21Indore12Karnataka8Hyderabad8Dehradun8Lucknow7Pune6Varanasi4Jabalpur3Ranchi3Visakhapatnam2Rajkot1SC1Raipur1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)21Section 26318Addition to Income11Section 14A10Section 153C6Disallowance6TDS5Natural Justice5Limitation/Time-bar5Survey u/s 133A

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

482 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] and\ncase of Daulatram Rawatmull [1966 (4) TMI 73 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT]. In\nconsidered view, the conversion of business income into other income and application\nof section 69A is bad and illegal. Accordingly, levy of tax u/s 115BBE on the income\namount liable to be quashed. Assessee appeal allowed.\n• Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Parmod

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

5
Condonation of Delay5
Section 684

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,CHURU vs. ITO TDS-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 265/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] by ITO, TDS-3, Jaipur [ for short AO ]. Since ITA no. 263/JP/2025 as lead case. 2. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of 482

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,CHURU vs. ITO TDS-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 266/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] by ITO, TDS-3, Jaipur [ for short AO ]. Since ITA no. 263/JP/2025 as lead case. 2. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of 482

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,CHURU vs. ITO(TDS)-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 263/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

TDS-3, Jaipur [ for short AO ]. Since\nthe issue raised in all the four appeals were identical were heard together\nand are disposed of by a common order by taking the fact of the case in\nITA no. 263/JP/2025 as lead case.\n2.\nAt the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of\n482 days

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,CHURU vs. ITO, TDS (3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 264/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

TDS-3, Jaipur [ for short AO ]. Since\nthe issue raised in all the four appeals were identical were heard together\nand are disposed of by a common order by taking the fact of the case in\nITA no. 263/JP/2025 as lead case.\n2.\nAt the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of\n482 days

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

482 : 1973 SCC (Tax) 318 : (1973) 88 ITR 323] .)” (b) The Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 Vs M/S Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd. [2023] 453 ITR 447 (SC) Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in a case where two views are possible and the Assessing Officer has adopted one view, such a decision, which might be plausible

SHRI SURENDRA GAJRAJ ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1018/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year: 2014-15 Cuke Surendra Gajraj, I.T.O., F-132 C, Road No. 12, Vki Area, Vs. Ward- 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abypg 2156 Q Appellant Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rahul Pandya (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 14/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Pandya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(3)

section 194H. That we have already submitted Copy of ITR & Copy of Computation of Total Income of Shri Vikram Singh Kulhari, Shri Rameshwar Singh & M/s. Surendra Gajraj HUF told AO. It would be observed that the said person have surrendered the income of Commission & paid the due taxes. Thus Double Taxation cannot be levied (kindly Refer Page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

ITA 377/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 131Section 131(1)Section 133A

section 133A (6) empowered the Income Tax Authority to record the statement on oath, therefore the recording of statement u/s 131 in this case was not ultra-vires. 6 Whether facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is justified in not appreciating the in other important fact that during the assessment proceedings of the assessee

PRADEEP KUMAR ROCHWANI, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 567/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, Adv. (throughFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 263

section is breached by the ld. AO. Thus, in the totality of facts and circumstances, it is not at all a case where the subjected assessment order should be alleged to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. There is neither error of law nor of facts. There is no erroneous assumption

BARODA RAJASTHAN KHESTRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 253/JPR/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

482/-. Revenue holds that as per information available on record, the assessee has wrongly claimed expenses of Rs. 1,37,05,000/- for the Advance written off and also claimed expenses of Rs. 3,39,25,000/- on account of provision for standard assets during the F.Y. 2016-17 relevant to AY 2017-18. Based on that contention a notice

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 164/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 165/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 152/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 153/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 156/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 159/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 160/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 161/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 162/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

TDS by various persons and entities of the Maverick group including assessee, along with many other individuals and entities (who are not at all related with assessee). These excel sheets contained details of amount borrowed, interest paid, Tax deducted, amount of loan returned with dates of assessee, as also contained the last column which had further sub columns which

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 461/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 263

482,500\n64\niii. Other Companies\nRMC Med Ltd.\n5,719,000\n2,907,000\n2,812,000\n64\nQuoated & Trade\nITC Limited\n211,749\n211,749\n64\nJP Infratech Ltd.\n1,020,000\n1,020,000\n64\nShare of Punjab Alkalies & Chemical Ltd.\n6,333,021\n6,333,021\n64\nB. Investments in Partnership firms\nMahabali Associates