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.

8 results for “TDS”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai303Delhi198Hyderabad70Kolkata56Chandigarh48Jaipur47Chennai37Indore30Bangalore28Pune21Ahmedabad19Rajkot16Agra12Surat10Amritsar10Nagpur8Raipur8Visakhapatnam7Lucknow5Guwahati4Calcutta2Cochin2Cuttack1Ranchi1Dehradun1Jodhpur1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 69C30Section 1478Addition to Income8Section 143(3)6Section 1486Survey u/s 133A6Section 133A5Disallowance5Section 44A4TDS

DCIT-CC-1(3), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS(EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGRAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 234/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 69C

section 69C of IT Act by disallowing brokerage and commission paid to Sri DVN Divya. During assessment proceedings appellant has submitted copy f bills issued by Sri DVN Divya, his ledger account in the books of appellant, bank statement showing payments made to him, copy of form 16A downloaded from Traces site with his PAN, complete name, address commission paid

4
Section 1323
Section 139(1)3

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

section 133(6) and confirmed of providing services to the assessee company and receipt of payment from it. They also provided copy of agreement, their bank statements and audited financial statements. In the assessment order Id. AO held that though the two companies have shown this amount as income in their P&L a/c but they are majorly engaged

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 27/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 115BSection 133ASection 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69C

section 69C being unexplained expenditure to contractors. The A.O., during the assessment proceedings noticed that the appellant has incurred expenditure of ` 1,25,89,787, towards mining expenses. These expenses are on account of extraction of manganese ore to following labour contractors– ` 17,17,000 1 A Appala Swamy 2 D.S. Prakash ` 16,78,687 3 Madhusudana

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. RADHIKA METALS AND MINERALS, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 23/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

section 69C of IT Act towards Opening Balances of Sundry Creditors. The AO during the assessment proceeding noticed that there are opening credit balances in accounts of 13 Sundry creditors totalling to Rs. 3,46,91,553/- out of which 3 creditors totalling to Rs.32,83,483/- have been declared by assessee as income under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AKOLA, NAGPUR vs. RBSD AND FN DAS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 36/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

section 69C of the Act is the sum of opening balance of various creditors brought forward from earlier years. No expenditure is incurred during the relevant previous year. The assessee has produced evidences regarding its payment in relevant previous year and subsequent years. The learned CIT(A) has decided this issue and the same is reproduced above. We find

ASSISTANT COMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHRIGOPAL RAMESHKUMAR SALES PVT. LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/NAG/2018[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 69C

section 69C of the Act as wrongly held by the Assessing Officer. 17. The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that there is absolutely no contradiction of TDS

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. R.B.S.D. AND F.N. DAS (EXPORT FIRM), VIZIANAGARAM

ITA 28/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69C

section 69C of the Act. 5. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition with following observations:- "4. Discussion and Decision:- Ground no.3, is regarding addition of ₹ 1,04,27,361, u/s 69C being unexplained expenditure to contractors. The A.O., during the assessment proceedings noticed that the appellant has incurred expenditure of ₹ 1,04,27,361, towards mining expenses

OSHIAN REALTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 460/NAG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Kanetkar and Shri Ameya S. KanetkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 271A

TDS was made from a particular payment, the transaction does not become genuine unless the genuineness of the transaction is proved with supporting evidences. Further the appellant has not demonstrated that the said expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purpose. Further the receipt of service for which commission payment was made is also not proved by the appellant