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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Section 40A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi521Mumbai471Chennai252Bangalore224Kolkata186Hyderabad64Jaipur57Ahmedabad52Indore46Raipur31Chandigarh30Pune30Visakhapatnam25Rajkot22Surat18Cuttack16Jodhpur12Guwahati12Lucknow12Patna12Nagpur10Amritsar10Cochin8Karnataka7Agra5Varanasi4Dehradun4Ranchi4Calcutta3Jabalpur2Allahabad2SC1Telangana1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 26021Section 194C4Disallowance4Section 40a3TDS3Section 260A2Section 14A(1)2Section 194H2Section 402Section 201(1)

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR P LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA/245/2018HC Karnataka24 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 40a

40a(i) and (ia) of the Act. The assessee thereupon furnished the information vide communication dated 12.08.2013. 4. The Assessing Officer initiated the proceeding under Section 201 and 201(1A) of the Act and treated the assessee as assessee in default in respect of the 6 amount made in provision, which was reversed / un- utilized for a sum of Rs.8

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, vs. M/S CORPORATION BANK

In the result, the third substantial question of law is also answered

2
Addition to Income2
ITA/427/2015
HC Karnataka
23 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(1)Section 14A(1)Section 194HSection 260Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40a

TDS under section 194H of the Income Tax Act? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is a Nationalized Bank. The assessee had filed the return of income on 28.09.2011 by which income of Rs.1412,98,.50,750/- was declared. Thereafter, a revised return was filed on 23.12.2011 by which income of Rs.1366

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SHRI G BALRAJ, PWD

In the result, question No

ITA/103/2011HC Karnataka31 Aug 2016

Bench: S.N.SATYANARAYANA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 260

section 40A(3) cannot apply. He also drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Balaji Engineering and Construction Works 323 ITR 351[Kar], where the finding of the Tribunal was upheld. 8. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee ought to have considered

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ADC INDIA COMMUNICATIONS LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

ITA/494/2022HC Karnataka30 Sept 2024

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

Section 260Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 9(1)(vii)

9(1)(vii) of the Act to an extent of `1,36,42,976 as assessee failed to deduct TDS on said payment which is towards fees on technical serves ignoring that conditions set out in said provisions were fully satisfied in case of assessee to make such disallowance? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

TIMES VPL LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order passed by the

ITA/274/2013HC Karnataka17 Oct 2019

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,P.G.M.PATIL

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 260Section 263Section 40

9 (2012) 208 TAXMAN 73 (Kar) as well as Circular No.13 of 2006 dated 13.12.2006 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue has submitted that the Assessing Officer did not examine the issue involved in the instant case while passing the order of assessment. It is further submitted that

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

9. Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] which was disposed-off by the CIT(A) vide order dated 29.03.2007. Aggrieved by the said order, both the assessee and the Department preferred separate appeals before the ITAT. The ITAT, vide order dated 31.10.2008 disposed of the appeals. Assessment Year

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

9. Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] which was disposed-off by the CIT(A) vide order dated 29.03.2007. Aggrieved by the said order, both the assessee and the Department preferred separate appeals before the ITAT. The ITAT, vide order dated 31.10.2008 disposed of the appeals. Assessment Year