Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

235 results for “TDS”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,327 Delhi5,120 Bangalore1,980 Chennai1,834 Kolkata1,681 Ahmedabad1,069 Hyderabad946 Pune818 Jaipur602 Chandigarh501 Raipur409 Indore408 Cochin344 Cuttack313 Surat287 Visakhapatnam279 Nagpur235 Rajkot228 Karnataka221 Patna199 Lucknow161 Amritsar139 Jabalpur123 Ranchi94 Jodhpur88 Guwahati76 Agra74 Allahabad60 Dehradun55 Panaji54 Telangana35 Varanasi23 SC16 Calcutta15 Kerala10 Himachal Pradesh6 Rajasthan6 Orissa4 Uttarakhand3 Punjab & Haryana2 J&K2 Bombay1 Gauhati1

Key Topics

TDS89 Section 4042 Section 234E41 Section 143(3)33 Addition to Income32 Disallowance19 Section 80I18 Section 153A15 Section 194C15 Section 147

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

Showing 1–20 of 235 · Page 1 of 12

...

14

income of Rs. 1,82,32,636/- instead of Rs. 2,03,00,000/-. He therefore, made an addition of Rs. 20,67,364/-. 1. Appellant's submissions on facts: 4.1)At the outset the assessee most humbly and respectfully submits that the Id. AO has not found any defect or inadequacy with the documents and evidences submitted

SANJAY KISAN CHOPDE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.176/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sanjay Kisan Chopde, The Deputy Balaji Associates, Gs 37, Vs Commissioner Of Amar Jyoti Palace, Lomat Income Tax, Circle-1, Square, Wardha Road, Nagpur. Nagpur – 440012. Pan: Abapc6968N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Agrawal – Advocate Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Dated 30.3.2022 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Dated 30.06.2016 For A.Y.2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Sanjay Kisan Chopde [A]

Section 143(3)Section 271

TDS credit of Rs.20,000 rather than making addition of Rs.200,000 to total income of the assessee. 6. The Appellant

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 307/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

addition was made by the AO mainly due to the mention of word 'cash' in the seized documents. On the left side of the documents, it is noted that the loans were taken in cheque. Normally, in that situation, the loans would not be repaid in cash. However, as argued by the 13 Shri Dharampal Ramkumar Agarwal ITA no.307/Nag./2016

DCIT-CC-1(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS(EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGRAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 234/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 69C

TDS amount etc. 9 R.B.S.D. And F.N. Das Export Firm ITA no.234/Nag./2023 5.3 However, in the assessment order the learned AO has made addition of Rs. 15,28,000/- u/s 69C r.w.s. 115BBE of IT Act since in the statement recorded u/s 132 Shri Manvendra Mor, partner of the firm, had agreed to offer this amount as additional income

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHIVPRAKASH RAJNARAYAN MISHRA(HUF), NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s

ITA 238/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Gupta a/wFor Respondent: Shri U.U. Kasar

additions made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of receipts excluding TDS. However, in respect of TDS credit, the assessee has already considered commission income

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 390/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

income, copy of Audit Report, details of additions to fixed assets, details of deductions claimed, details of TDS, details of Bank

ASSISTANT COMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHRIGOPAL RAMESHKUMAR SALES PVT. LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/NAG/2018[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 69C

income. He pointed out that, without prejudice to the arguments on the merits of the various additions made, which he sought to argue to merits as well, this additional surrender encapsulates the miscellaneous additions made by the Assessing Officer much less additions totalling to ` 37,47,574 (` 31,90,320 + ` 5,27,067 + ` 30,187) as well as other additions

GURPALSINGH CHANANSINGH NAGRA,AKOLA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

TDS was made in the hands of the assessee using his PAN. The receipt is already included in the hands of the firm and hence adding the same is in the hands of the assessee is incorrect and unjustifiable. Thus, the assessee has submitted that the income which is subject matter of the addition

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201

Income Tax Officer (TDS) …………… Appellant Ward–2(3), Chandrapur 442 401 v/s Ultratech Cement Ltd. Unit Awarpur Cement Works Awarpur, Tal Koparna …………… Respondent Dist: Chandrapur 442 917 TAN – NGPUO1449A Revenue by : Shri Gitesh Kumar Assessee by : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date of Hearing – 08.05.2018 Date of Order – 09.05.2018 O R D E R PER BENCH The aforesaid five appeals

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR. 8, NAGPUR vs. M/S V.D. KANAL, NAGPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 182/NAG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe

Section 133ASection 143(3)

TDS amount. To honour the commitment made to survey team he had paid tax of Rs.30.18 lacs as agreed by survey team. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal-II), Nagpur had ignored the above working &: further added Rs.7,28,941/- in assessee's total income. I request for the deletion of the additional

M/S V.D.KANAL,NAGPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -8, NAGPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 220/NAG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe

Section 133ASection 143(3)

TDS amount. To honour the commitment made to survey team he had paid tax of Rs.30.18 lacs as agreed by survey team. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal-II), Nagpur had ignored the above working &: further added Rs.7,28,941/- in assessee's total income. I request for the deletion of the additional

M/S PYRAMID DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. JOINT CIT RANGE 1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 343/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri U.U. Kasar

Section 131Section 133ASection 40A(3)

income made on account of on–money towards sale of flats, therefore, the plea of the assessee is not tenable. Accordingly, he made addition of ` 39,23,718. 4. The Assessing Officer further noticed that the assessee has debited an amount of ` 2,58,86,000, to purchase account. In order to ascertain the correctness of purchases, the Assessing Officer

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 438/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 512/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

income of M/s. RBSSN filed for AY 2010- 11 and tax paid thereon. There is no statement of the assessee confronting any seized material, as regards any surrender or any acceptance regarding inflation in the expenditure. The AO stated that the nature of the business and the nature of expenditure of the assessee being the same as that

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 176/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Harshad S. Vengurlekar

Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 24

Income Tax Act. The assessee has complied with the provisions of TDS on the interest payments as stated by the AO in the Remand Report. On facts, it is held that the addition

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 568/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 56Section 80P

addition made by Learned AO to the Income of Appellant to the extent of Rs.41,88,448/- in respect of interest income by treating interest income received on FD of Nationalized Banks as income from other sources u/s 56 of Income Tax Act, 1960 by wrongly applying ratio laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Totagars