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.

91 results for “TDS”+ Section 251(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi397Mumbai346Bangalore193Raipur105Kolkata91Karnataka86Chennai77Ahmedabad58Jaipur53Chandigarh47Hyderabad42Lucknow28Surat24Pune24Nagpur24Indore12Rajkot11Visakhapatnam9Panaji9Amritsar8Dehradun7Kerala5Cuttack5Cochin5Telangana2Jodhpur2Guwahati2Ranchi2Allahabad1Patna1Agra1Rajasthan1Jabalpur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)76Addition to Income47Deduction47TDS44Section 244A38Section 80I36Section 14A35Section 4034Disallowance34Section 201(1)

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 119/KOL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

TDS 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the issues, which are in challenge before us. 7. So far as the main issue relating to deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act is concerned, the ld. CIT(A), confirmed the 7 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year

Showing 1–20 of 91 · Page 1 of 5

31
Section 14728
Section 25025

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 116/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

TDS 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the issues, which are in challenge before us. 7. So far as the main issue relating to deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act is concerned, the ld. CIT(A), confirmed the 7 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 117/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

TDS 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the issues, which are in challenge before us. 7. So far as the main issue relating to deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act is concerned, the ld. CIT(A), confirmed the 7 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 118/KOL/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

TDS 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed on the issues, which are in challenge before us. 7. So far as the main issue relating to deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act is concerned, the ld. CIT(A), confirmed the 7 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year

ACIT, CIRCLE - 13(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. PADMA LOGISTICS & KHANIJ PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 606/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 2

251/- Less: Amount suo moto disallowed by the assessee Rs. 77,500/- Rs.18,32,751/- 32. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who gave relief to the assessee by holding as under: “The Assessing Officer, in paragraph 26.1.3 of the assessment order has stated that: “Whereas, as per the provision

I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S VISHAL EQUITY SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2267/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Ghyas Uddin, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

2 M/s. Vishal Equity Services Pvt. Ltd 5. The revenue as aggrieved by the order of Commissioner of appeals before us by raising the aforementioned grounds of appeals in support of which the learned DR submits that the Commissioner appeals does not have power to send any issue to the assessing officer except in conform, reduce, enhance or annul

M/S. VICTOR COMMERCIAL CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1127/KOL/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Victor Commercial Co. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Ltd., Kolkata, C/O. M/S Salarpuria Jajodia & Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Vs Co., 7, C.R., Avenue, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Kolkata - 700072 Bypass, Kolkata - 700017 (Pan: Aabcv0011C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S. Jhajaria, ARFor Respondent: Pradip Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 250

TDS, nor the order is a speaking one. In this respect, it is relevant to examine the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, which are reproduced as under: “250(6) – The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason

INDIA CONSTRUCTION,DIAMOND HARBOUR vs. ITO, WARD - 25(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2592/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250

2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned A.O. was not justified disallowing a sum of Rs 4,27,58,040/- being on account of bills raised and net profit of Rs 11,88,673/- and the same is added to the income of your petitioner. 3) That on the fact and circumstances of the case

M/S. BANDHAN BANK LTD. (ERSTWHILE GHOSH FINANCE LTD),KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-5(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 465/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath Paul, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)(vi)Section 192Section 250Section 37

TDS could be given if the proof was asked for by the Assessing Officer in terms of section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but not in case where the assessee had placed the proof on record without filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus, documents placed on record with

DCIT,CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ALL INDIA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 52/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 40

TDS u/s 194J and 194I of the Act. As per the provision laid down under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act states that "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to ·38, the following amounts shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" any interest, commission

DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1041/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

251(1)(a) of the Act.” The facts and circumstances are exactly identical and the grounds raised are identically worded except the amount, hence we will take the facts from AY 2007-08 and decide the issue. 12. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee company during FY 2006-07 relevant to this AY 2007-08 received advances from

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 230/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

251(1)(a) of the Act.” The facts and circumstances are exactly identical and the grounds raised are identically worded except the amount, hence we will take the facts from AY 2007-08 and decide the issue. 12. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee company during FY 2006-07 relevant to this AY 2007-08 received advances from

OBEROI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1030/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

251(1)(a) of the Act.” The facts and circumstances are exactly identical and the grounds raised are identically worded except the amount, hence we will take the facts from AY 2007-08 and decide the issue. 12. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee company during FY 2006-07 relevant to this AY 2007-08 received advances from

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. OBEROI HOTELS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 233/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

251(1)(a) of the Act.” The facts and circumstances are exactly identical and the grounds raised are identically worded except the amount, hence we will take the facts from AY 2007-08 and decide the issue. 12. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee company during FY 2006-07 relevant to this AY 2007-08 received advances from

THE EXECUTOR TO THE ESTATE OF SUKHENDU PRASAD CHOUDHURY,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1278/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(1)

2. For that on the facts of the case, the Ld. C.I.T.(A) has directed to AO to verify whether the receipts against the TDS so claimed have been offered to tax and after having carried out the verification and upon his satisfaction regarding the claim of the appellant is directed to allow the credit of TDS amounting to Rs.71

DCIT, CIRCLE - 57, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HEIGHT INSURANCE SERVICES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1939/KOL/2010[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Dr. Adhir Kumar Bar, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate
Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194DSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

251 of the report, which reads as under: “(iv) On the scope of section 271C read with section 273B: Section 271C, inter alia, states that if any person fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax as required by the provisions of Chapter XVII-B then such person shall be liable to pay, by way of penalty

ACIT, CIR-2(TDS), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 22/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 201(1)

2) the franchises really acted as a facilitator or instrumentality of providing services by the assessee to the ultimate subscriber; ITA No.1204,1302,2409/Kol/2016 & 22/Kol/2017 A.Ys 12-13 & 13-14 M/s Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. ACIT/DCIT (TDS) Kol. Page 4 3) the franchises had no free choice to sell it and everything was being regulated and guided by the assessee

M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(TDS), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 2409/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 201(1)

2) the franchises really acted as a facilitator or instrumentality of providing services by the assessee to the ultimate subscriber; ITA No.1204,1302,2409/Kol/2016 & 22/Kol/2017 A.Ys 12-13 & 13-14 M/s Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. ACIT/DCIT (TDS) Kol. Page 4 3) the franchises had no free choice to sell it and everything was being regulated and guided by the assessee

M/S IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT (TDS)-58, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1204/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 201(1)

2) the franchises really acted as a facilitator or instrumentality of providing services by the assessee to the ultimate subscriber; ITA No.1204,1302,2409/Kol/2016 & 22/Kol/2017 A.Ys 12-13 & 13-14 M/s Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. ACIT/DCIT (TDS) Kol. Page 4 3) the franchises had no free choice to sell it and everything was being regulated and guided by the assessee

ACIT, CIR-2, TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1302/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 201(1)

2) the franchises really acted as a facilitator or instrumentality of providing services by the assessee to the ultimate subscriber; ITA No.1204,1302,2409/Kol/2016 & 22/Kol/2017 A.Ys 12-13 & 13-14 M/s Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. ACIT/DCIT (TDS) Kol. Page 4 3) the franchises had no free choice to sell it and everything was being regulated and guided by the assessee