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.

93 results for “TDS”+ Section 40clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,023Delhi2,821Bangalore1,359Chennai1,198Kolkata971Ahmedabad641Hyderabad589Pune374Cochin368Jaipur331Indore277Chandigarh263Karnataka223Raipur201Visakhapatnam182Cuttack181Surat168Rajkot121Nagpur93Lucknow81Amritsar73Jabalpur69Ranchi57Jodhpur50Guwahati50Dehradun45Agra39Allahabad31Panaji29Telangana29Patna28Calcutta13Kerala11Varanasi11SC9Uttarakhand2Gauhati1Rajasthan1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 4089Section 143(3)71Addition to Income63TDS53Section 200A48Deduction44Section 14742Disallowance41Section 6838Section 153A

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)

TDS, filing of PAN of the Payee-Transporter alone is sufficient and no confirmation letter as required by the learned CIT is required; v) Sections 194C(6) and Section 194C(7) are independent of each other, and cannot be read together to attract disallowance u/s 40

Showing 1–20 of 93 · Page 1 of 5

28
Section 194C23
Section 143(2)22

M/S TAWARI TRADERS ,BULDHANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, KHAMGAON

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 193/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

Section 40(a) is applicable irrespective of the method of accounting followed by an assessee. Therefore, by using the term 'payable' legislature included the entire accrued liability. If assessee was following mercantile system of accounting, then the moment amount was credited to the account of payee on accrual of liability, TDS

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

TDS is not to be deducted from the payment made to transporters who furnished PAN. The Assessing Officer has wrongly interpreted that this provision is applicable to tax deducted by assessee who are engaged in transport business. This in my considered opinion is an erroneous interpretation not sustainable in law. In my considered opinion learned CIT(Appeals) has correctly appreciated

SHRI ABHIJIT MADHUSUDAN SAPKAL,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 553/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya. (S.M.C.)

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non- deduction of TDS under section 194J of the Act. 4. The learned

GOPAL DENESHCHANDRA TULSHAN ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AKOLA

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

ITA 201/NAG/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)(b)Section 40Section 50

TDS has not been deducted and hence the Assessing Officer has disallowed the pertaining expenses i.e., interest of ` 2,03,227, under section 40

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 115/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri J.M. RanadeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 194ASection 40

TDS under section 194A of the Act. Hence, the learned CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed ` 5,84,367 (30% of ` 19,47,890) under section 40

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 113/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri J.M. RanadeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 194ASection 40

TDS under section 194A of the Act. Hence, the learned CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed ` 5,84,367 (30% of ` 19,47,890) under section 40

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 114/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri J.M. RanadeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 194ASection 40

TDS under section 194A of the Act. Hence, the learned CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed ` 5,84,367 (30% of ` 19,47,890) under section 40

SHRI DEEPAK SURESH GADGE,,NAGPUR vs. JOINT. CIT, CIR.- I, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 104/NAG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Deepak Suresh Gadge, The Joint Commissioner Of Pranav Apartments, Iind Lane, Income Tax- Circle-I, Behind The Hitvada, Dhantoli, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Nagpur Vs. Bhavan, Fifth Floor, Mecl Building, Seminary Hills, Pan : Abzpg6643H Nagpur- 440006

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar (DR)
Section 139Section 143Section 40

section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2013, read with s. 201, provides that despite failure to deduct TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AKOLA vs. M/S RAMDEVBABA CHARITABLE SOCIETY, AKOLA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 394/NAG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri K.P Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT
Section 201(1)Section 40

section 40(a) was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004. 7.0 Respectfully following the jurisdictional pronouncements and keeping in view that the facts of the appellant's case are squarely applicable to these decisions, impugned addition made u/s 40(a)(ia) at Rs.1,47,19,608/- for AY 2011-12 & of Rs.7

RAGHAV AGRITECH,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 182/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Agrawal
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 194CSection 1aSection 234ASection 40

TDS on payment of ` 2,06,50,000, to contractor for building construction has not been deducted and hence 30% of sum paid is disallowable under section 40

AMARCHAND LAXMINARAYAN MANTRI,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 289/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 44A

TDS is not deducted from three parties. The Assessing Officer made addition under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the ground

AMARCHAND LAXMINARAYAN MANTRI,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 290/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 44A

TDS is not deducted from three parties. The Assessing Officer made addition under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the ground

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 437/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &
Section 194CSection 40

TDS and therefore, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) were

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 435/NAG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &
Section 194CSection 40

TDS and therefore, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) were

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 436/NAG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgarwalFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari &
Section 194CSection 40

TDS and therefore, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) were

SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SINGH ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(1), NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 96/NAG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.96/Nag/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward- 8(1), Nagpur. Hanshu Patel Building, Amravati Road, Wadi, Nagpur- 440023. Pan : Axbps9499K Appellant Respondent Assessee By None : Revenue By : Shri G. J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2006-07 Arises Against The Cit(A)-2, Nagpur’S Order Dated 21.08.2019 Passed In Case No. Cit(A)-2/141/2013-14, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. The Very Factual Position Existed On All Previous Hearing As Well. He Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex-Parte.

For Respondent: Shri G. J. Ninawe
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

40(a)(ia) disallowance of Rs.9,22,133/- on account of his failure to deduct TDS on the alleged truck hire charges payments. 3. Mr. Ninawe vehemently contended that the assessee ought to have deducted TDS on the ground that hire charges paid to various brokers without deducting TDS. He further quotes section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S. FUELCO COAL INDIA LTD., NAGPUR

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 90/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40aSection 68

TDS on professional fee paid to Advocate Shri Rahul Bhangade. The AR has referred to the second proviso to section 40

KHALID NADEEM ALLARAKHA,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 9/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 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 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43A(3)

40(a)(i), therefore order passed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Nagpur erred in not considering the detailed reply and submission of assessee therefore order passed is illegal, invalid and bad in law.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 24th August

AHSAAN QURESHI,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 323/NAG/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep JainFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

40(a)i and in Section 201(1) of Income Tax Act 1961, by Finance Act 2012 is not retrospective and 2 Ahsaan Qureshi ITA no.323/Nag./2023 consequently Commission paid to Shri Ashfaque Khan Rs.100000/= without deducting TDS