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.

126 results for “TDS”+ Section 24clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,789Delhi2,766Bangalore1,503Chennai1,023Kolkata746Hyderabad571Pune569Ahmedabad552Indore548Jaipur352Chandigarh289Cochin266Raipur210Karnataka202Visakhapatnam160Cuttack148Surat127Nagpur126Rajkot109Lucknow81Jabalpur64Amritsar55Jodhpur47Guwahati44Ranchi38Dehradun38Patna37Allahabad35Agra30Panaji25Telangana23SC13Varanasi11Kerala10Calcutta10Rajasthan4Orissa2Uttarakhand2Bombay1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 234E214Section 200A99TDS85Section 194A56Deduction40Section 143(3)37Section 25034Section 201(1)33Limitation/Time-bar31Exemption

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 126 · Page 1 of 7

30
Section 20129
Condonation of Delay28

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

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 215/NAG/2019[2014-15 Q-4 - 26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 212/NAG/2019[2014-15 Q1-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 216/NAG/2019[2015-16 Q1-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S RAJYAS SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 208/NAG/2019[214-15 (Q-4(26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 211/NAG/2019[2013-14 Q4-(26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 213/NAG/2019[2014-15 Q2-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 214/NAG/2019[2014-15 Q-3-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 209/NAG/2019[2013-14-Q2-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 217/NAG/2019[2015-16 Q2-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

ITA 210/NAG/2019[2013-14 Q3-26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

Section 234E

TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly, we hold that intimation issued by Assessing Officer under section 200A 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.” 9 Group of (111 Cases) u/s.234E C. Fatheraj Singhvi

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
Section 194C

24,484, making a claim of refund of ` 2,35,590. The Assessing Officer made additions towards transportation charges on the ground that the assessee claimed credit for TDS, but failed to consider corresponding receipts in its books of account. It is the claim of the assessee that it has considered commission income in its books of account

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

ITO, WARD- 4 (1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SWAPNIL ANIL AHIRKAR, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 70/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) in respect of cash payment made by the assessee. However, any expenditure can be disallowed only when the deduction in respect of expenditure is claimed by the assessee. In this case admittedly, the asaessee has not claimed the expenditure on purchase of land by debiting the same to the Profit & Loss account but he expenditure for purchase