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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Section 241clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi252Mumbai215Bangalore202Karnataka87Chandigarh69Kolkata64Hyderabad61Chennai59Jaipur39Ahmedabad23Pune21Raipur18Nagpur9Indore8Rajkot7Surat7Guwahati5Dehradun4Visakhapatnam3Telangana3Patna2Jodhpur2Cuttack2Cochin2Allahabad2Lucknow2SC1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)8Section 2635Section 1472Section 1482Addition to Income2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

ITA 617/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 251Section 263

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, in as much as the original assessment order dated 11-02-2016 is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3. That the Ld. PCIT was wrong in not passing an speaking order ignoring the submissions made by the assessee during proceeding u/s 263 rendering the order under appeal

MRS. RANJANA,MRIZAPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 505/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed
ITAT Lucknow
31 Dec 2025
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Mrs Ranjana V. The Assessing Officer Village Dewapur Pachwal Nafc Post Rajapur, Aamghat Mirzapur (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aoxpr7130M (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant By: Shri Narendra Kumar Sahu, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.03.2025, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Income Tax Department Was In Possession Of Information That The Assessee Had Purchased An Immovable Property Valued At Rs.60,00,000/- . The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice To The Assessee Under Section 148 Of The Act. However, The Assessee Neither Responded To The Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act Nor Filed Any Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Assessing Officer (Ao)

For Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Section 250 (6) and principles of natural justice [Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE, 281 CTR 241 (SC)]. 4. The addition of ₹6,00,000/- Cash Deposit was made without seeking clarification or allowing submission of evidence. Had the opportunity been granted, the appellant would have established the source of funds. 5. The addition of ₹1,00,000/-, received from Shri