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.

4 results for “TDS”+ Section 69Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore39Mumbai35Jaipur33Chandigarh17Agra14Delhi14Chennai13Surat6Amritsar6Rajkot5Kolkata4Indore3Ahmedabad2Pune2Dehradun1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 405Section 133(6)4Section 143(3)3Addition to Income3Section 194C(1)2Section 1312Section 682TDS2

ITO, WD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PURNA CHANDRA SAHOO, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1344/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1344/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito, Wd-44(1), Kolkata Vs. Purna Chandra Sahoo

For Appellant: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Akash Bansal, FCA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40Section 69B

section 69B of the Act to the tune of Rs.8,43,562/- Purna Chandra Sahoo CO. No. 50/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08 11. On appeal, Ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by ld AO. Aggrieved by the order of the ld CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 12. The ld. Counsel for the assessee begins

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-49(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S VISWAKARMA RESIDENCY, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 255/KOL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/ Assessment Years:2016-17 बनाम / Acit, Cir-49(1), Kolkata M/S. Viswakarma Residency Uttarpan Complex, Ds-Iv, V/S. 2Nd Fl., Manicktala Civick Centre, Block-2 & 3, 2Nd Fl., Kolkata-700 054. Pan: Aaifv3279Q अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. Hearing Through Video Conferencing अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manish Kanojia, Cit, Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri S.M Surana, Advocate, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-08-2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26-10-2021

Section 131Section 133(6)

TDS, Loan repaid and closing balance. Subsequently on receipt of the Show Cause Notice the assessee tiled copies of PAN Card, Acknowledgement of returns of income, audited financial statements, bank statements, confirmation of account and statements showing source of funds and nature of receipts in respect of each of the loan creditors along with copies of the assessment orders

DEBOTTOR TRUST ESTATE OF RAMMOHAN MULLICK,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 43(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and that or Revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/KOL/2016[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 194C(1)Section 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

TDS. 19. At the outset, we find that Ld.CIT(A) upheld the action of AO by observing that the contention of assessee regarding the reimbursement does not hold good. Hence there is violation of sec 194J. The ld. AR also requested us to restore the matter to the AO for fresh verification in terms of the in terms

ITO, WARD 2(2), PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. M/S. KRISHNA TRADING, PASCHIM MEDINIPUR

In the result, Revenue appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2003-04

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

section 133(6) for the business transactions with the assessee. As a result the AO noticed the following discrepancies. a) Siva Cement Ltd., had given a total credit of Rs.2889/- on various dates towards Bank commission. But the assessee-firm has not shown the same. Therefore, you are asked to explain why the amount of Rs.2889/- will not be added