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.

47 results for “TDS”+ Section 24clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,789Delhi2,766Bangalore1,503Chennai1,023Kolkata746Hyderabad571Pune569Ahmedabad552Indore548Jaipur352Chandigarh289Cochin266Raipur210Karnataka202Visakhapatnam160Cuttack148Surat127Nagpur126Rajkot109Lucknow81Jabalpur64Amritsar55Jodhpur47Guwahati44Ranchi38Dehradun38Patna37Allahabad35Agra30Panaji25Telangana23SC13Varanasi11Kerala10Calcutta10Rajasthan4Orissa2Uttarakhand2Bombay1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 234E67Section 143(3)50TDS31Section 143(1)28Section 194Q28Section 206C28Section 200A28Section 194A19Section 201(1)18Addition to Income

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 112/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q - 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

18
Disallowance15
Deduction12

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 109/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q- 1)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 110/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26 Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 111/JODH/2019[2017-18 (26Q - 3)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 107/JODH/2019[2016-17 (26 Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT-TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 106/JODH/2019[2016-17 (26Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Bhawani Singh Bhati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 154Section 200ASection 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL STATION HEADQUARTER BSF,BIKANER vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE, JODHPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 302/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Girish Mehta, JCIT DR
Section 200Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act. 24. Now, looking at various provisions of the Act, the issue needs to be adjudicated in the case of assessee, wherein admittedly, TDS

AJAYAB SINGH MUKHTYAR SINGH,PADAMPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 695/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194Q

24,621/- as against Rs. 1,86,084/-. Thus disallowed the claim of TDS on the ground that gross receipts as per form 26AS is more than that of what were shown in the ITR. This appears due to TDS deducted by the buyer under section

ANU SETIYA,SADULSHAHAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 572/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194Q

24,621/- as against Rs. 1,86,084/-. Thus disallowed the claim of TDS on the ground that gross receipts as per form 26AS is more than that of what were shown in the ITR. This appears due to TDS deducted by the buyer under section

BOHAR SINGH,SRI KARANPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 696/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194Q

24,621/- as against Rs. 1,86,084/-. Thus disallowed the claim of TDS on the ground that gross receipts as per form 26AS is more than that of what were shown in the ITR. This appears due to TDS deducted by the buyer under section

MUKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,RAISINGHNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/JODH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)

24,621/- has been allowed, as against total TDS of Rs. 1,86,084/- claimed by the Appellant. 3. Being aggrieved by the order under section

MUKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,RAISINGHNAGAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 41/JODH/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)

24,621/- has been allowed, as against total TDS of Rs. 1,86,084/- claimed by the Appellant. 3. Being aggrieved by the order under section

SUSHIL KUMAR MARLECHA,PALI vs. DEPUTY/ASSTT, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1,, GHAZIABAD / JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 123/JODH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 205CSection 206CSection 234E

TDS statements by deductor would result in perennial problems being faced by Department while processing return of income and it would result in financial burden to Government namely on account of late payment of refund interest- Held, yes- Whether since section 234E levies a fee to regularize said late filing, it could not be hied that section 234E suffered from

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 83/JODH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201. Having taken note of the fact, we are of the view that the duty is cast upon the assessee to furnish primary facts to establish that the recipient of the payment has offered the income to tax. Since, no material has been brought on record by the assessee to establish such claim, we decline to interfere with

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 84/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201. Having taken note of the fact, we are of the view that the duty is cast upon the assessee to furnish primary facts to establish that the recipient of the payment has offered the income to tax. Since, no material has been brought on record by the assessee to establish such claim, we decline to interfere with

MAHARAJA GANGA MAHAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, TD,, BIKANER

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 85/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Shafi Mohd. Chouhan, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Mohan, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

section 201. Having taken note of the fact, we are of the view that the duty is cast upon the assessee to furnish primary facts to establish that the recipient of the payment has offered the income to tax. Since, no material has been brought on record by the assessee to establish such claim, we decline to interfere with

KALU RAM SUSHIL KUMAR,PADAMPUR vs. ITO WARD - 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 525/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 44A

24 Prop. M/s Sanjay Shriganganaga 7483 R Trading Company, r Shop No. 81, New Dhan Mandi, Raisinghnagar, Ganganagar 8. 38/Jodh/2025 2022- Rajesh Goyal ITO Ward – 1 AKMPG 23 M/s Sahi Ram Mandi Hanumangarh 5666 L Ram, 85B Nai Anaj Mandi, Hanumangarh - 335512 1. Shri Vedant Gupta, CA (Virtual) 2. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual) 3. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual

JAGDISH PRASAD AND SONS HUF,HANUMANGARH JN. vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HANUMANGARH

Appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 710/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 44A

24 Prop. M/s Sanjay Shriganganaga 7483 R Trading Company, r Shop No. 81, New Dhan Mandi, Raisinghnagar, Ganganagar 8. 38/Jodh/2025 2022- Rajesh Goyal ITO Ward – 1 AKMPG 23 M/s Sahi Ram Mandi Hanumangarh 5666 L Ram, 85B Nai Anaj Mandi, Hanumangarh - 335512 1. Shri Vedant Gupta, CA (Virtual) 2. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual) 3. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual

GANESH SINGH GULAB JI,SUMERPUR vs. DDIT, CPC BANGALURU, INCOME TAX OFFICER-SUMERPUR, SUMERPUR

Appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 563/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 44A

24 Prop. M/s Sanjay Shriganganaga 7483 R Trading Company, r Shop No. 81, New Dhan Mandi, Raisinghnagar, Ganganagar 8. 38/Jodh/2025 2022- Rajesh Goyal ITO Ward – 1 AKMPG 23 M/s Sahi Ram Mandi Hanumangarh 5666 L Ram, 85B Nai Anaj Mandi, Hanumangarh - 335512 1. Shri Vedant Gupta, CA (Virtual) 2. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual) 3. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual

VIMLA DEVI,RAISINGHNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/JODH/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 44A

24 Prop. M/s Sanjay Shriganganaga 7483 R Trading Company, r Shop No. 81, New Dhan Mandi, Raisinghnagar, Ganganagar 8. 38/Jodh/2025 2022- Rajesh Goyal ITO Ward – 1 AKMPG 23 M/s Sahi Ram Mandi Hanumangarh 5666 L Ram, 85B Nai Anaj Mandi, Hanumangarh - 335512 1. Shri Vedant Gupta, CA (Virtual) 2. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual) 3. Shri Rajesh Goyal, CA (Virtual