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.

16 results for “TDS”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata27Delhi23Bangalore20Mumbai16Patna13Chennai10Lucknow9Indore6Nagpur5Jaipur3Chandigarh2Guwahati2Raipur2Pune2Rajkot1Ahmedabad1Cochin1Hyderabad1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 26357Section 143(3)14Section 10A12Revision u/s 26310Section 1479Section 144A5Section 1485Section 1544Deduction4Section 132

BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7457/MUM/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

section 144A of the Act in respect of additional TDS credit from 01.05.2007 to 20.06.2014 since the refunds were lying

JAEE VISHWAS JOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE-21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1028/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed
3
Disallowance3
Addition to Income3
ITAT Mumbai
29 Jul 2020
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodjaee Vishwas Joshi Vs. Acit,Circle-21(1) 8Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan 1002, Om Co-Op.Housing Society Limited Bkc M.B.Raut Road Mumbai-400 051 Shivaji Park, Dadar Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No.Aelpa7074L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 144ASection 147Section 148

section 144A stand violated rendering order bad in law. Detailed grounds attached. 3. Botched up investigation by ADIT and A.O. - Transactions between the appellant and Avron and Sarvottam took place in F.Y. 2010-11. Investigation by ADIT(lnv.) was done in F. Y. 2017-18. Further investigation was done by A.O. in the F.Y. 2018-19. Thus there

DHL GLOBAL FORWARDING FREIGHT SHARED SERVICES (INDIA) LLP ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (PCIT)-41, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2109/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarm/S Dhl Global Forwarding V/S. Principal Commissioner Of Freight Shared Services बनाम Income Tax (Pcit) – 41, Room (India) Llp No. 541, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 5Th Floor, A Wing 247 Park, To C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Lbs Road, Vikhroli West, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai–400083, Maharashtra Mumbai–400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aapfd3128F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain a/w S.Chaugule, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, (CIT-DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40a

TDS deduction. Consequently, 30% of this amount was disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the Return of Income of the assessee. As per Clause 21(B) (ii) of the Tax Audit Report Rs. 4,34,98,589/- pertained to Provision for contractor, Rs. 80,90,413/- pertained to provision for professional charges

GREAVES COTTON LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal

ITA 7424/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhgreaves Cotton Ltd. Acit Circle-6(3), Industry Manor, Appasaheb Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aaacg2062M Appellant Respondent Greaves Cotton Ltd. Acit Circle-6(3), Industry Manor, Appasaheb Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aaacg2062M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Smt. Arati Vissanji (Advocate) Respondent By : Shri Abbi Rama Karthikey (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Smt. Arati Vissanji (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Abbi Rama Karthikey (DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(9)

TDS and Advance Tax as per the provisions of Section 115JAA of the Income tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08 and allowed interest u/s 244(1A) of the Income tax Act, 1961. GROUND: H : INTEREST U/S 234B - Rs. 2,05,99,228/- On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Assessing Officer should not have

RELIANCE MONEY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3259/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263Section 50

144A of the Act. The Appellant submits that the Assessing Officer had conducted proper and adequate inquires and therefore the order of the Assessing Officer is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and therefore the order of learned PCIT under section 263 of the Act may be cancelled. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. I: GROUND

BARCLAYS BANK PLC,MUMBAI vs. CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-RANGE-1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 827/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 263Section 37

TDS is required to be withheld on the same. 8.2 In the written submission dated 16 December 2016, it is contended as under: "Barclays Capital. ;i division of Barclays Bank Ple. UK (Barclays UK) manages the global derivatives operations of the Barclays group. The derivative products offered to clients typically include foreign exchange, interest rate and equity. The remittance made

JYOTI HARSHAD MEHTA (LEGAL HEIR OF LATE HARSHAD S. MEHTA),MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT (C)- 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1159/MUM/2020[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 1992-93
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 263Section 263(1)

TDS and advance tax would be given after due verification of the same. Similarly for ground Nos. 29 & 31, the revised interest shall be calculated as per directions of the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28/06/2017. In fact in this interim order dated 28/09/2017, though it was termed as order giving effect to the ld. CIT(A)‟s order

THE J.K. TRUST BOMBAY,MUMBAI vs. CIT (E), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3769/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S The J. K. Trust Cit (Exemption) Bombay, R. No.617, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ New Hind House, Piramal Chambers, Vs. Narottam Morrjee Marg, Lalbaug, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400001

Section 11Section 263

144A; 8 M/s J.K. Trust Bombay (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Director General or] Director

IMPRESARIO ENTERTAINMENT & HOSPITALITY PVT LTD,MUMBAI, INDIA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PCIT, MUMBAI-5, AYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1926/MUM/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024
For Appellant: \nShri Rahul Hakani, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 263

144A;(ii)an order\nmade by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the\nperformance of the functions of an Assessing Officer [or the Transfer Pricing\nOfficer, as the case may be,] conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders\nor directions issued by the Board or by the Principal Chief Commissioner or\nChief Commissioner

REMY DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3899/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

TDS deducted (by the builder) on the interest payable against their “Loans & Advances” is claimed as refund. 4.7 A perusal of all the 70 benami concerns managed and controlled by Bhanwarlal Jain Group show that all of them have the same features mentioned in the preceding paragraph. This shows that all the 70 concerns are not into any genuine business

REMY DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3900/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

TDS deducted (by the builder) on the interest payable against their “Loans & Advances” is claimed as refund. 4.7 A perusal of all the 70 benami concerns managed and controlled by Bhanwarlal Jain Group show that all of them have the same features mentioned in the preceding paragraph. This shows that all the 70 concerns are not into any genuine business

REMY DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3898/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

TDS deducted (by the builder) on the interest payable against their “Loans & Advances” is claimed as refund. 4.7 A perusal of all the 70 benami concerns managed and controlled by Bhanwarlal Jain Group show that all of them have the same features mentioned in the preceding paragraph. This shows that all the 70 concerns are not into any genuine business

DY CIT - 26(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. PRATIBHA CHINA STATE JOINT VENTURE UNIVERSAL MAJEXTIC, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 468/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.468 /Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-26(1) M/S Pratibha China State Room No 623, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Joint Venture Vs. Universal Majestic, 14Th Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 Floor, Off Eastern Expressway, Ghatkopar Mankhud Link Road, Govandi, Mumbai-400043 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabap0740 (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Mr. Hiren Bhatt, Sr Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 31/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Hiren Bhatt, Sr AR
Section 143(2)Section 145

section 199(1). Aggrieved by same, the appellant filed an application u/s.144A on 15.12.2016 requesting the JCIT-27(2), Mumbai to direct the Assessing Officer not to disallow the TDS on such grounds. The JCIT observed that the sales shown in the P&L a/c were more than the turnover shown in Form 26AS and that the appellant had offered

SAIGAL SEA TRADE,MUMBAI vs. CIT -18, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2511/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Saigal Sea Trade, Cit-18, J.V. House, 02Nd Floor, D.S. Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ Babrekar Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400028 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs6920K

Section 142(1)Section 263

TDS. Plea was also raised that on the issue of commission, the Ld. Assessing Officer examined and allowed. It was fairly agreed by the Ld. counsel that both these issues were not discussed in the assessment order by the Ld. Assessing Officer but hastily 3 M/s Trancfex Studios Pvt Ltd. added that the assessment order was passed after examining

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3558/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 10ASection 147Section 263

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Commissioner

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3717/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 10ASection 147Section 263

144A; (ii) an order made by the Joint Commissioner in exercise of the powers or in the performance of the functions of an Assessing Officer conferred on, or assigned to, him under the orders or directions issued by the Board or by the [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Director General or] Director General or [Principal Commissioner