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.

873 results for “TDS”+ Section 271(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai873Delhi845Bangalore283Chennai196Karnataka134Kolkata126Hyderabad98Ahmedabad98Jaipur94Raipur93Pune56Chandigarh47Indore35Visakhapatnam23Lucknow18Rajkot18Surat17Nagpur17Panaji10Amritsar9Guwahati7Patna6Dehradun5Cochin5Telangana4Cuttack4SC4Varanasi4Jabalpur3Jodhpur3Agra2Ranchi1Allahabad1Orissa1Kerala1

Key Topics

Addition to Income60Section 143(3)58Section 4056Penalty45TDS42Section 80I41Disallowance41Deduction31Section 271(1)(c)30Section 14A

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DICT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1052/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 873 · Page 1 of 44

...
23
Section 14823
Section 115J22

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1053/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1054/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1051/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5804/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5805/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5806/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5807/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5808/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5810/MUM/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5809/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section M/s. Avarsekar & Sons Pvt. Ltd., 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5648/MUM/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5643/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5642/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5644/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

UNITY INFRAPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 5080/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dyani
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)Section 274

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

UNITY INFRAPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 5082/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dyani
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)Section 274

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

UNITY INFRAPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 5081/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dyani
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)Section 274

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

UNITY INFRAPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 5085/MUM/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dyani
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)Section 274

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice

UNITY INFRAPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 5084/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dyani
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)Section 274

271(1)(b) of the Act was levied on the assessee for the said seven assessment years, for failure on its part to comply with filing the requirements called in the questionnaire annexed to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.10.2013. In our view, it is relevant to extract hereunder the questionnaire appended to the notice