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.

46 results for “TDS”+ Reopening of Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,090 Delhi786 Chennai603 Pune373 Bangalore306 Kolkata202 Indore177 Ahmedabad169 Hyderabad165 Jaipur97 Chandigarh93 Visakhapatnam80 Cochin73 Raipur68 Surat65 Rajkot54 Nagpur46 Lucknow41 Agra31 Patna31 Guwahati27 Karnataka20 Panaji14 Amritsar14 Cuttack11 Dehradun8 Jabalpur8 Ranchi7 Allahabad7 SC5 Jodhpur3 Varanasi3 Calcutta2 Telangana2 Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 200A99 Section 234E95 Section 14742 Section 143(3)30 Section 6828 Section 14827 TDS27 Addition to Income20 Section 26317 Section 154

VIJAY VINOD DURAGKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 339/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

Assessment was reopened merely to verify discrepancy- i.e. variation between Income declared by assessee and Income shown in TDS Certificate

BANK OF INDIA ,PRASHEONI BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3

16

Rectification u/s 15416

Unexplained Cash Credit8

ITA 111/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest. 23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given

BANK OF INDIA,SIHORA BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 104/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest. 23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 350/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

reopening of assessment u/s 148/147, the learned AO had issued show cause notice u/s 142(1) dated 10/12/2021 alongwith questionnaire (Copy of notice is enclosed at Pages 68- 71 of Factual Paperbook (Additional). 1.2 The assesse had filed its written submission on 01/03/2022 alongwith necessary documentary evidences (Refer Pages 1-67 of Factual Paperbook (Additional). 1.3 Therefore, the assessee submits

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

ITA 349/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

reopening of assessment u/s 148/147, the learned AO had issued show cause notice u/s 142(1) dated 10/12/2021 alongwith questionnaire (Copy of notice is enclosed at Pages 68- 71 of Factual Paperbook (Additional). 1.2 The assesse had filed its written submission on 01/03/2022 alongwith necessary documentary evidences (Refer Pages 1-67 of Factual Paperbook (Additional). 1.3 Therefore, the assessee submits

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PANCHAYAT SAMITI MURTIZAPUR ,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1(2), AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 26/NAG/2018[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER , PANCHAYATI SAMITI , MURTIZAPUR ,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1, AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 27/NAG/2018[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 237/NAG/2019[2013-14 Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 238/NAG/2019[2013-14 Quarter3 ]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 239/NAG/2019[2013-14 Quarter4]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 240/NAG/2019[2014-15 Quarter -3]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 241/NAG/2019[2014-15 Quarter-4]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2019[2015-16 Quarter-2]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 243/NAG/2019[2015-16 Quarter -3]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

ANIL LADHARAM HASSIJA,GONDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD 2 (4) , BHANDARA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 37/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD 1(2), AKOLA , AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 404/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD 1(2) , AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 405/NAG/2017[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD 1(2) , AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 406/NAG/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PANCHAYAT SAMITI,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1(2), AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 25/NAG/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest.” 14. The Hon’ble High Court thus held that where the impugned notices given

MAHESHKUMAR HARGOVIND GOYAL,NAGPUR vs. WARD 1(2), NAGPUR

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

ITA 322/NAG/2023[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 May 2024

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act after recording the reasons for re-opening of assessment. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer, obtaining the approval of the PCIT-3, Nagpur, notice dated 29/03/2018, under section 148 Maheshkumar Hargovind Goyal ITA no.322/Nag./2023 of the Act was issued which was served upon the assessee on 31/03/2018, and sought explanation from