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.

31 results for “TDS”+ Section 86clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,261Mumbai1,249Bangalore566Chennai373Kolkata296Ahmedabad185Hyderabad174Indore173Chandigarh128Jaipur124Karnataka121Raipur97Pune97Cochin69Visakhapatnam55Cuttack51Lucknow41Jodhpur35Nagpur31Surat30Rajkot24Agra21Amritsar20Allahabad20Kerala19Ranchi19Telangana17Guwahati15Patna13Dehradun8Varanasi6SC5Jabalpur4Panaji3Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)51Section 234E34Section 6830Section 153A29Section 200A29Section 80I18Section 4017Addition to Income17Section 69C16Disallowance

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 286/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y.Marathe, Sr.Dr
Section 200Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [“learned CIT”], for the assessment year 2013-14. Sunilkumar Rajendra Rai vs TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:– 2. “ Grounds of Appeal Tax Effect 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

16
TDS12
Search & Seizure11

YOGESH NANDALAL CHANDE,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-1, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 402/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin JaiswalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") received from Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru, wherein a demand of ` 26,54,950, was raised, the details of which are as under:– i) Granting short credit of TDS of ` 14,93,947, as against full credit of ` 16,86

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

section 50(a)(ia), the break up of which is as under:– a) M/s. Kach Ghar, Akola (Prop. Sunil D. tulshan) ` 1,86,667 b) Sohanlal Ganeshlal Bilala ` 7,777 c) Vijay Oil Industries ` 8,783 –––––––– ` 2,03,227 ====== Gopal Dineshchandra Tulshan ITA no.201/Nag./2023 AO has disallowed the above interest expenditure, since this appellant has not deducted TDS

TARANGAN INFRAVENTRURES PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC- TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 234/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sl. No. 1 – Shri Saket BhatedFor Respondent: Sl. No. 1 to 5 – Shri G.J. Ninawe
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the order passed u/s. 200A confirming the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for A.Y. 2013-14 and it is set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

MPA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. TDS CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 91/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sl. No. 1 – Shri Saket BhatedFor Respondent: Sl. No. 1 to 5 – Shri G.J. Ninawe
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the order passed u/s. 200A confirming the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for A.Y. 2013-14 and it is set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

TALUKA AGRICULTURE OFFICER,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO TDS WARD- 2(3), CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 87/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sl. No. 1 – Shri Saket BhatedFor Respondent: Sl. No. 1 to 5 – Shri G.J. Ninawe
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the order passed u/s. 200A confirming the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for A.Y. 2013-14 and it is set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

TALUKA AGRICULTURE OFFICER ,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO, TDS WARD-2(3), CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 86/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sl. No. 1 – Shri Saket BhatedFor Respondent: Sl. No. 1 to 5 – Shri G.J. Ninawe
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the order passed u/s. 200A confirming the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for A.Y. 2013-14 and it is set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

KIRTI POPATBHAI PATEL,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 152/NAG/2021[F.Y. 2013-14 (Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Oct 2022

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

For Appellant: Sl. No. 1 – Shri Saket BhatedFor Respondent: Sl. No. 1 to 5 – Shri G.J. Ninawe
Section 200ASection 234E

section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the order passed u/s. 200A confirming the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for A.Y. 2013-14 and it is set aside. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

86,240, with MAT purpose book profit at ` 2,31,61,735. The return of income thus filed was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was served on 10/09/2015, on the assessee company. Scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed vide order dated

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

86,500) are reflecting in the books of accounts of the assessee and which has further been duly considered by the learned CIT(A). On a conspectus of the facts and the details as provided by the assessee, we are of the considered view that the learned CIT(A) was right in deleting the additions to the extent

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

86 of paper book of other documents). 6 M/s. Tiwari Traders ITA no.193/Nag./2019 Here the appellant contended that the provision of section 40(a)(ia) is applicable only on amount of interest "payable". In this regard, the provision of section 40(a)(ia) applicable for the subject assessment year is produced hereunder: 40. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

RAVINDRA KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE AKOLA , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 403/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 36Section 68Section 69A

section 36)\(1)(iii) of the Act. 10. The Assessing Officer disallowed a part of the interest considering it as interest on capital not borrowed for the purpose of business on proportionate basis. The assessee had debited ` 34,15,880, on account of interest on unsecured loans of ` 1,81,14,226. The Assessing Officer considered 24.39 per 4 Ravindra

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 19/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: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40A(2)(b)

section 143(3) of the Act and proceeded to dispose off the appeal filed by the assessee on merits of the case wherein the learned CIT(A) deleted all the additions, as tabulated above, vide his impugned order dated 18/12/2015 supra. Against this order, the Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative, Shri Sandipkumar

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 114/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 113/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 119/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 117/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 116/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 115/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

TDS has been deducted on such interest expenses claimed; more so, the alleged sum had already been repaid on 4-10-18 prior to the search conducted on 11-7-19; the addition of Rs.7,59,397 is not justified, is liable to be deleted.” 29. The Assessing Officer has made following additions:– Opening bal. Interest credited Loan creditors

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

TDS on the interest payments as stated by the AO in the Remand Report. On facts, it is held that the addition made by the AO was not justified. The addition of Rs. 7,86,217/- made by the AO due to disallowance of interest is, therefore, deleted. The AO is directed accordingly.” 12 Shree Agarwal Finance India