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.

107 results for “TDS”+ Section 24clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,904Delhi2,801Bangalore1,530Chennai1,045Kolkata755Hyderabad439Pune405Ahmedabad383Jaipur279Indore265Chandigarh235Cochin204Karnataka202Raipur202Surat113Nagpur107Visakhapatnam91Rajkot87Lucknow83Cuttack64Amritsar41Patna39Dehradun38Ranchi36Guwahati35Jodhpur34Panaji24Agra23Telangana23Allahabad21SC13Jabalpur12Varanasi11Calcutta10Kerala10Rajasthan4Uttarakhand2Orissa2Bombay1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 234E184Section 200A99TDS71Section 194A56Section 143(3)54Deduction44Section 25037Section 14736Section 6833Limitation/Time-bar

ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 143(1)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

section makes it amply clear that on the Contractor undertaking Transport of Goods in course of his Transport Business, furnishing PAN to the person making such payment/credit, the payee shall not be required to effect TDS from such payment to the Transporter. On furnishing the PAN No. from the recipient Transporter Contractor, the immunity from making TDS under sec. 194C

Showing 1–20 of 107 · Page 1 of 6

32
Section 201(1)30
Addition to Income29

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

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

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

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

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

In the result, appeal for the A

ITA 391/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

24. In view of the foregoing submissions and explanation, it is respectfully submitted that the expenses incurred by the appellant are for the purpose of business of the appellant and hence eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a). Even if your Honour deems it fit that such expenses should be disallowed and hence added to the total income

SHRIRAM DADAJI MATTE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 180/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 201(1A) / 206C(7) of the Act. 24. After hearing both the parties and on a perusal of the material available before us, we find that the interest on late payment of TDS

SHRIRAM DADAJI MATTE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 179/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section 201(1A) / 206C(7) of the Act. 24. After hearing both the parties and on a perusal of the material available before us, we find that the interest on late payment of TDS

SHEPHALI ANIL MALVIYA,NAGPUR vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals (Ms

ITA 115/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe, CIT–DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 20OA of the Act in all the appeals does not stand and the demand raised by charging late filing fees under section 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted." C. Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India, 73 taxmann.com

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

section 10(3) of the Act. Ground no.5, raised by the Revenue is thus dismissed by upholding the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A). 18. Ground no.6, raised by the Revenue relates to the addition of ` 68,02,624, made on account of unexplained unsecured loans. 19. The observations of the learned CIT(A) while deleting the addition

DIGP GROUP CENTRE CRPF,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CPC(TDS) , GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 294/NAG/2022[2015-2016, Qtr-3]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur18 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.294 & 295/Nag/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Digp Group Centre Crpf, Vs. Dcit, Cpc (Tds), D/O The Office Of The Digp Ghaziabad. Group Centre, Hingna Road, Digdoh Hills, Midc Area, Nagpur- 440019. Pan : Aaagd0143E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani Revenue By : Smt. Rashmi Mathur Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Dated 15.12.2021 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.294/Nag/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 271H(1)(a)Section 272ASection 272A(2)

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

DIGP GC CRPF,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 295/NAG/2022[2015-2016 Qtr-4]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur18 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.294 & 295/Nag/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Digp Group Centre Crpf, Vs. Dcit, Cpc (Tds), D/O The Office Of The Digp Ghaziabad. Group Centre, Hingna Road, Digdoh Hills, Midc Area, Nagpur- 440019. Pan : Aaagd0143E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani Revenue By : Smt. Rashmi Mathur Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Dated 15.12.2021 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.294/Nag/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234ESection 271HSection 271H(1)(a)Section 272ASection 272A(2)

24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under Section 200A are in respect of fees under Section 234E for the period prior to 1.6.2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making

BANK OF INDIA,MAHAL BRANCH NAGPUR vs. DY.CIT(TDS)CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 160/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

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

TDS for 4 quarter of the year, the financial year involved is F.Y. 2009-10 & 2011-12. In that case, the due date for passing of order under sub-section (3)(i) of section 201 of the Act is 2 years from the end of the financial year 2009-10 or 2011-12, as the case may be. Thus

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON NAGPUR vs. DY.CIT(TDS), CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 153/NAG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

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

TDS for 4 quarter of the year, the financial year involved is F.Y. 2009-10 & 2011-12. In that case, the due date for passing of order under sub-section (3)(i) of section 201 of the Act is 2 years from the end of the financial year 2009-10 or 2011-12, as the case may be. Thus

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)

24,04,174, pertains to interest income earned by the assessee Society from deposits (FDR) with Nationalized Banks. The Assessing Officer added this interest under the head ―Income From Other Sources‖, treating this as a non–business income. The assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that in the assessee’s line of business, the assessee has to pay interest

M/S ATASHA ASHIRWAD BUILDERS,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T (TDS) RANGE 1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 480/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 206C(3)Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS statement being technical delay and not venial in nature. In order to come to such conclusion the Co-ordinate Bench relied on many decisions of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Allahabad. The relevant portion at para 24 to 28 is reproduced here-in-below for ready reference : “24. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court

SHRI MAHESH DEVDUTTA GUPTA,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3),, NAGPUR

In the result, the addition so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 143/NAG/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Jun 2022AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V.Loya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale, JCIT
Section 68

TDS certificates, which were enclosed with the return of income. It was submitted that in the earlier assessment year 2003–04, the Assessing 6 ITANo.143/Nag/2017 Officer assessed income from rent and service charges received from ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd and IDBI Bank Ltd. as income from House property. It was submitted that though the ld.CIT(A) invoked provisions

NATURAL RECREATIONS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 81/NAG/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

Section 200ASection 234E

24-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years. 2. We find that all the appeals were filed with a delay of 703 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the above said

NATURAL RECREATION PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 80/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

Section 200ASection 234E

24-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years. 2. We find that all the appeals were filed with a delay of 703 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the above said

NATURAL RECREATION PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 82/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

Section 200ASection 234E

24-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years. 2. We find that all the appeals were filed with a delay of 703 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the above said

NATURAL RECREATIONS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 78/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

Section 200ASection 234E

24-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years. 2. We find that all the appeals were filed with a delay of 703 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the above said

NATURAL RECREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME,CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 77/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

Section 200ASection 234E

24-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years. 2. We find that all the appeals were filed with a delay of 703 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the above said