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.

293 results for “TDS”+ Section 5(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,051Delhi3,898Bangalore2,194Chennai1,576Kolkata1,145Pune819Patna503Ahmedabad439Cochin421Hyderabad404Jaipur321Indore303Karnataka293Chandigarh227Raipur204Nagpur153Visakhapatnam133Surat119Lucknow119Rajkot92Dehradun74Cuttack60Jodhpur59Amritsar44Guwahati37Panaji31Telangana30SC25Agra19Jabalpur18Kerala16Ranchi14Allahabad13Varanasi8Himachal Pradesh8Calcutta6Rajasthan5Punjab & Haryana4Orissa2Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 260154Section 234E90TDS75Section 260A25Section 201(1)23Deduction21Section 4018Section 20111Section 234B10Section 192

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

TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) on 31.01.2005 and the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 14.02.2005. A questionnaire was issued on 27.04.2006 calling for certain

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

Showing 1–20 of 293 · Page 1 of 15

...
9
Disallowance9
Addition to Income8

TDS of Rs.6,02,14,066/- and advance tax payment of Rs.59,50,80,000/-. The assessee claimed refund of Rs.17,12,21,725/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) on 31.01.2005 and the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 14.02.2005. A questionnaire was issued on 27.04.2006 calling for certain

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/663/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/665/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/670/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/649/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/646/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/644/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/664/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/666/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/667/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/770/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/662/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/768/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/650/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/648/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/671/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/769/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/654/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/642/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

C’ Bench, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short). 3. The appeals were admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of tax under Section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act as determined by the TDS authority? - 22 - 2. Whether denial of exemption under