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.

545 results for “TDS”+ Section 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai545Delhi477Bangalore312Kolkata123Chennai113Hyderabad111Jaipur108Raipur46Chandigarh42Ahmedabad39Karnataka37Visakhapatnam28Rajkot24Lucknow23Pune22Indore21Jodhpur18Agra16Panaji16Surat16Nagpur14Guwahati13Patna12Cochin8Ranchi5Varanasi4SC3Allahabad3Jabalpur2Telangana2Dehradun2Orissa1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Survey u/s 133A70Section 201(1)62Section 133A61Addition to Income57Deduction47TDS47Section 6839Section 14A37Section 20135Disallowance

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22,

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3709/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 545 · Page 1 of 28

...
35
Section 194C31
Section 143(3)28

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7214/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7209/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7208/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7213/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7211/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3646/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

M. R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 790/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 6847/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3645/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7212/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 6848/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3711/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 3710/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 1144/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

ITA 7210/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 21Section 40Section 40a

TDS under various provisions of section by invoking provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 15. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the above disallowances are not based on any evidence i.e. the incriminating material found during the course of search. As the original assessment

NITIN A. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1200/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Nitin A. Shah, Dcit, Cc-1(3), 31/32, 8Th Floor, 905, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Bhavan, Giriraj Apartment, Vs. Old Cgo Building Annex, Teen Batti, Walkeshwar, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 006. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahps 3826 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek Anchaliya, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, DR

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short , 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was carried out on ) was carried out on 04/10/2013 by the Investi Investigation Wing in the office premises of the in the office premises of the assessee located at Panchratna, assessee located at Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai. In the case of , Mumbai. In the case

NITIN A. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1201/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Nitin A. Shah, Dcit, Cc-1(3), 31/32, 8Th Floor, 905, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha Bhavan, Giriraj Apartment, Vs. Old Cgo Building Annex, Teen Batti, Walkeshwar, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 006. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahps 3826 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek Anchaliya, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, DR

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short , 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) was carried out on ) was carried out on 04/10/2013 by the Investi Investigation Wing in the office premises of the in the office premises of the assessee located at Panchratna, assessee located at Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai. In the case of , Mumbai. In the case

ITO(TDS)-2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. N ROSE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6334/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B R Baskaranshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.6328/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) (Assessment Year : 2019-20) Ito (Tds)-2(3)(1), Room No.909, 9Th Floor, Mtnl Building, Cumbala Hill, Peddar Road, Mumbai - 400026 ............... Appellant V/S N Rose Developers Private Limited, C-1 Building No.3, Sumer Nagar Chs Ltd. ……………… Respondent S.V. Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai -400092 Pan : Aaccn5680J Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Agrawal Revenue By : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 194Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 250Section 4S

TDS verification under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted in the case of the assessee. During the survey

ITO(TDS)-2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. N ROSE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6328/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B R Baskaranshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.6328/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) (Assessment Year : 2019-20) Ito (Tds)-2(3)(1), Room No.909, 9Th Floor, Mtnl Building, Cumbala Hill, Peddar Road, Mumbai - 400026 ............... Appellant V/S N Rose Developers Private Limited, C-1 Building No.3, Sumer Nagar Chs Ltd. ……………… Respondent S.V. Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai -400092 Pan : Aaccn5680J Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Agrawal Revenue By : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 194Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 250Section 4S

TDS verification under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted in the case of the assessee. During the survey