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.

47 results for “TDS”+ Reopening of Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,037 Delhi765 Chennai603 Indore412 Pune403 Bangalore291 Hyderabad259 Ahmedabad209 Kolkata199 Jaipur127 Chandigarh120 Visakhapatnam112 Surat95 Cochin93 Raipur79 Rajkot57 Cuttack47 Nagpur47 Ranchi43 Agra35 Lucknow34 Patna30 Guwahati27 Karnataka20 Allahabad19 Amritsar15 Panaji14 Jabalpur8 Dehradun8 SC5 Jodhpur4 Varanasi3 Calcutta2 Telangana2 Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 200A96 Section 234E89 Section 14745 Section 143(3)35 Section 14829 Section 6828 TDS28 Addition to Income21 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

JAGDISHPRASAD MAHESHWARI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

15

Rectification u/s 15415

Reopening of Assessment8

ITA 748/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.748/Nag/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jagdishprasad Maheshwari Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-4, C/O Surgical India, Nagpur Shop No. 214,215,224,225, Sandesh Dawa Bazar, Near Haj House, Ganjipeth, Nagpur-440018, Maharashtra Pan: Acypm9289M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

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

TDS and further on verification of scrutiny assessment record, assessee has claimed expenses of purchase of gold jewellery worth Rs.51,400/- and also the assessee had given money to the associations for conducting of conference. All these three issues have been referred in the reasons recorded for reopening

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

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

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 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

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

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

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