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.

123 results for “TDS”+ Section 246Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi178Indore134Mumbai123Chennai114Pune87Raipur35Bangalore33Cochin26Dehradun26Jabalpur23Kolkata19Nagpur14Chandigarh13Surat11Panaji10Visakhapatnam9Amritsar8Jodhpur7Lucknow7Hyderabad7Jaipur7Karnataka4Ahmedabad4Cuttack3Allahabad2Agra1

Key Topics

Section 234E264Section 200A238TDS77Section 246A47Section 15440Section 143(1)40Section 143(3)32Section 244A30Deduction23Section 250

ASIAN PIPES & PROFILES P. LTD,AMBERNATH vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

ITA 4741/MUM/2016[2013-14 (24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Kapil D. Talreja &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 156Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A

DISHA DISTRIBUTORS,MUMBAI vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 123 · Page 1 of 7

21
Addition to Income19
Disallowance17
ITA 4742/MUM/2016[2013-14 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Kapil D. Talreja &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 156Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A

ASIAN PIPES & PROFILES P. LTD,AMBERNATH vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

ITA 4740/MUM/2016[2013-14 (24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Kapil D. Talreja &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 156Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A

SPRING TIME CLUBS & HOSPITALITY SERVICES P.LTD,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals filed by different assessees for different quarters relating to different years are allowed

ITA 4744/MUM/2016[2013-14 (24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Sprigtime Clubs & Hospitality Assessing Officer, Tds Ward Services Pvt. Ltd. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road Vs. 2Nd Floor, Sprig Avenue, Club Road Kalyan (W), 421301 Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan – Aaocs9107M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kapil D. TalrejaFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 156Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns is appealable. The demand raised by way of charging of fees under section 234E of the Act is under section 156 of the Act and any demand raised under section 156 of the Act is appealable under section 246A

DDIT (IT) 4(2),MUMBAI vs. ABU DHABI SHIP BLDG PJSC, MUMBAI

In the result, Department’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 5418/MUM/2013[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Dr. Dipak Ripote
Section 195(2)Section 246A(1)Section 9(1)

246A(1) and 248 of the I.T. Act, 1961 do not enable M/s Abu Dhabi Ship Building to file the appeal against the order of Section 195(2) of IT Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact mentioned in para

FORESIGHT HOLDINGS, MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 3938/MUM/2015[2013-14(Q-2,3 & 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sanjay Gargm/S. Foresight Holdings Dcit (Tds) Cpc #11, 2Nd Floor, Ismail Mansion Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 94/96/98 Bazargate, Fort Sector 3, Vyshali Mumbai 400001 Ghaziabad 201010 Pan – Aacff9466H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

CONCEPT MANAGEMENT CONSLUTING LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CPC TDS, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4428/MUM/2015[2014-15(24Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

ARPANNA MOTORS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4175/MUM/2015[2013-14(26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

DIAMOND SHIPBROKERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 1(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4127/MUM/2015[2014-15(27Q-1)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

KASH REALTORS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO TDS 1(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4199/MUM/2015[2013-14(26Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

BHASKAR KRISHNA SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CPC TDS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3964/MUM/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

MEDICAL ENGINEERS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TS) CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4072/MUM/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

HITESH SHANKAR SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CPC TDS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3962/MUM/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

ROHA DYECHEM P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 2971/MUM/2015[2009-10(26Q 4TH)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

DINESHKUMAR S. GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4088/MUM/2015[2013-14(Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

BHOJA VITTAL SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CPC TDS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3961/MUM/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

KAPOOR GLASS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) CPC, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4071/MUM/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.W. Angolkar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

BABITA MALKANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO TDS 1(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed as indicated above

ITA 4475/MUM/2015[2013-14(Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

MILESTONE SPACE,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

ITA 4745/MUM/2016[2013-14 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Respondent: Ms. Aarju Garodia
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees

MILESTONE ESTATE,KALYAN vs. A.O. TDS WD KALYAN, KALYAN

Appeals of the assessees are allowed as above

ITA 4743/MUM/2016[2013-14 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Respondent: Ms. Aarju Garodia
Section 200ASection 234E

246A(a) and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) could have examined the validity of the adjustments made under the intimation under section 200A in the light and scope of the provisions of section 200A. The Tribunal further observed that since there was no enabling provision under section 200A before 01.06.15 providing for the adjustment in respect of levy of fees