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.

34 results for “TDS”+ Section 26clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,536Mumbai2,422Bangalore1,422Chennai917Pune647Kolkata599Hyderabad538Ahmedabad502Cochin435Jaipur334Indore294Chandigarh271Raipur226Karnataka186Surat156Visakhapatnam134Cuttack127Rajkot96Nagpur91Lucknow86Jabalpur63Amritsar46Ranchi43Guwahati41Jodhpur34Agra32Dehradun32Allahabad22Panaji20Telangana18Patna17SC14Kerala11Varanasi9Calcutta4Uttarakhand3Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati1Rajasthan1Orissa1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 234E67Section 143(3)52Section 206C28Section 200A28Addition to Income21Section 194I18TDS17Section 26314Section 201(1)13Section 154

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

12
Deduction7
Survey u/s 133A4

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

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

TDS returns. In the absence of enabling provisions, levy of fees could not be effected in the course of intimation issued under section 200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. 26

DALPAT SINGH NANECHA,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 246/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Aug 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Hemant Chhajed (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Kajal Singh (CIT) a
Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194IA of the IT Act. Therefore, the assessee has committed default for non- deduction of TDS on payment of Rs. 31,50,000/- which is ¼ of the total consideration of Rs. 1,26

RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 245/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Aug 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Hemant Chhajed (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Kajal Singh (CIT) a
Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)

Section 194IA of the IT Act. Therefore, the assessee has committed default for non- deduction of TDS on payment of Rs. 31,50,000/- which is ¼ of the total consideration of Rs. 1,26

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

section should be construed strictly and reasonably. The Bombay High Court in the case of Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (Bom) 393 : (1984) 150 ITR 460 (Bom), has also taken the same view. The Bombay High Court was dealing with a case where an application for renewal of registration was not signed by one of the partners

SUKHDEV CHAYAL,BIKANER vs. PCIT-1,, JODHPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2016-17 Sukhdev Chayal, Vs. Pr.Cit-1, Near Ratan Sagar Well, Jodhpur. Bikaner. Pan No. Afjpc 9250 J

Section 143(3)Section 263

TDS is same i.e. 10% under both the Sections. Therefore, there is no escapement of income from the clutches of revenue. 24 ITA 26/Jodh/2021 Sukhdev Chayal Vs PCIT 12. After analyzing the totality of facts and circumstances and after evaluating the documents placed on record and the order passed by the A.O., we are of the view that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 168/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 169/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 167/JODH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 144/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 143/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 142/JODH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 141/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 140/JODH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 139/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

26,425/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon'ble SC in the case Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC)" 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances