Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

9 results for “TDS”+ Section 251(1)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi398 Mumbai348 Bangalore193 Raipur104 Kolkata91 Karnataka86 Chennai77 Jaipur53 Ahmedabad49 Chandigarh37 Hyderabad29 Lucknow28 Nagpur24 Pune24 Surat24 Indore12 Rajkot11 Visakhapatnam9 Panaji9 Amritsar8 Kerala5 Cuttack5 Cochin5 Jodhpur2 Guwahati2 Ranchi2 Telangana2 Jabalpur1 SC1 Allahabad1 Rajasthan1 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 14A9 Section 143(3)8 TDS8 Addition to Income8 Section 2507 Section 406 Section 2515 Section 253(2)5 Section 143(1)5 Section 132

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 179/PAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

5

Survey u/s 133A5

TDS and the Karagir had considered the same amount for taxation in his person income tax return. Thus, no cash was paid back to appellant. The chart below depicts the said contention of the appellant. The appellant also filed copies of ITR of these Karigars for year under consideration. 4.10 In view of the above discussion

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 175/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

TDS and the Karagir had considered the same amount for taxation in his person income tax return. Thus, no cash was paid back to appellant. The chart below depicts the said contention of the appellant. The appellant also filed copies of ITR of these Karigars for year under consideration. 4.10 In view of the above discussion

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 176/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

TDS and the Karagir had considered the same amount for taxation in his person income tax return. Thus, no cash was paid back to appellant. The chart below depicts the said contention of the appellant. The appellant also filed copies of ITR of these Karigars for year under consideration. 4.10 In view of the above discussion

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 177/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

TDS and the Karagir had considered the same amount for taxation in his person income tax return. Thus, no cash was paid back to appellant. The chart below depicts the said contention of the appellant. The appellant also filed copies of ITR of these Karigars for year under consideration. 4.10 In view of the above discussion

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 180/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

TDS and the Karagir had considered the same amount for taxation in his person income tax return. Thus, no cash was paid back to appellant. The chart below depicts the said contention of the appellant. The appellant also filed copies of ITR of these Karigars for year under consideration. 4.10 In view of the above discussion

SRITHIK ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED,GOA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) PANAJI,GOA, PANAJI,GOA

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 Pan : Aaics1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Din & Order No 1068425181(1) Dt. 06/09/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Originated From Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. [‘Ld. Ao’].

For Appellant: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)Section 40Section 68

TDS (2) ₹42,41,967- addition u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit upon assessee’s failure to substantiate closing cash balance (3) further addition of ₹98,54,509/- towards advances remained unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by aforestated assessment the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. NFAC on 17/01/2019 which was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

ITA 390/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

For Appellant: Ms Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

TDS thereon, it cannot be treated as an ascertained liability on account of employee emoluments. 4) The Learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the section 115JB is complete code in itself and it overrides all other provisions of the Act. The book profit is deemed to be total income of the assessee and ITAT-Panaji Page

MAHALASA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,PHONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3), PANAJI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 56/PAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth

Section 143(3)Section 251Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(4)

251 for remanding to AO or directing the AO to decide, subject to conditions, in accordance with directions; and accordingly the remarks be expunged in Para 9 of the impugned order that "subject to the condition that the 3 ITA.No.56/PAN./2019 nominal members criteria be fulfilled i.e. the appellant should not have nominal members. Accordingly, as a result

VIVIDHA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,SANKHLIM, BICHOLIM, GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), PANAJI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 55/PAN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sham KamatFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ

Section 143(3)Section 251Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(4)

251 for remanding to AO or directing the AO to decide, subject to conditions, in accordance with directions; and accordingly the remarks be expunged in Para 9 of the impugned order that "subject to the condition that the nominal members criteria be fulfilled i.e. the appellant should not have nominal members. Accordingly, as a result of verification