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.

28 results for “TDS”+ Section 2(19)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,143Mumbai3,001Bangalore1,637Chennai1,103Kolkata576Pune535Hyderabad417Ahmedabad402Jaipur295Chandigarh208Raipur206Cochin139Visakhapatnam128Indore120Nagpur112Karnataka111Rajkot104Lucknow94Surat90Cuttack42Ranchi40Jodhpur35Panaji31Patna28Guwahati26Telangana26Amritsar25Agra22Dehradun21Allahabad15SC15Jabalpur10Kerala10Calcutta10Himachal Pradesh6Varanasi6Uttarakhand3Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 26364Section 153A56Section 143(3)20Section 12716Section 14716Section 25015Section 142(1)14Limitation/Time-bar13Addition to Income12TDS

SOCIETY FOR ADVANCEMENT OF VILLAGE ECONOMY,GAYA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA

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

ITA 14/PAT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 250(6)Section 28

section 2(15) of the Act, the Society was not eligible for claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act. As the TDS was not deducted on payments to CSP, a sum of ₹71,79,910/- paid to CSP agents was disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus, the excess on income over expenditure was considered and the disallowance

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 271(1)(b)9
Penalty8

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 328/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 329/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 322/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 323/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 325/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 326/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 327/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

19. For that on the facts and in Circumstances of the case the officer has erred in considering irrelevant materials, which has vitiated the order of Assessment. 20. For that the impugned order is misconceived and arbitrary in nature. 21. For that the appellant prays to add, amend, modify, and any ground, if necessarily. 22. For that other grounds

BBCPL-SKPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

2), the ld. Assessing Officer may make an assessment in the manner provided in Section 144. Therefore, reading of sub-section (3) would contemplate that where it is not possible for the ld. Assessing Officer to deduce true income of an assessee, then he would reject the accounts and assess the income in accordance with Section 144 of the Income

BBCPL-RCPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 127Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

2), the ld. Assessing Officer may make an assessment in the manner provided in Section 144. Therefore, reading of sub-section (3) would contemplate that where it is not possible for the ld. Assessing Officer to deduce true income of an assessee, then he would reject the accounts and assess the income in accordance with Section 144 of the Income

BALKRISHNA BHALOTIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

2), the ld. Assessing Officer may make an assessment in the manner provided in Section 144. Therefore, reading of sub-section (3) would contemplate that where it is not possible for the ld. Assessing Officer to deduce true income of an assessee, then he would reject the accounts and assess the income in accordance with Section 144 of the Income

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 263

section 142 of the Act dated 17.02.2021, which is placed at page 28 of the paper book and the information called reads as under:- 19 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises Reason for selection :- (1) Claim of Large Value Refund (2) High ratio of refund to TDS

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 63/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 153Section 153C

TDS, TCS and self- assessment tax. Ground No. 10-General in nature. During the course of appellate proceedings appellant raised additional ground which is as under: - “That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 5,50,00,000/- on the basis of seized documents found in third party

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 62/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 153Section 153C

TDS, TCS and self- assessment tax. Ground No. 10-General in nature. During the course of appellate proceedings appellant raised additional ground which is as under: - “That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 5,50,00,000/- on the basis of seized documents found in third party

BIJAY KUMAR SARAF,DALDALI BAZAR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1,MUZFFARPUR, IT-OFFICE, POLICE LINE, SIKANDERPUR MUZZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 205/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194(7)Section 194C(6)Section 250

19,760/- and ₹ 61,12,102/-. The assessee filed the PANs of the transporters in the course of the appeal before us and stated that it was not liable for deduction of tax as per the proviso to sub-section (5) of section 194C as the aggregate payment did not exceed ₹ 75,000/-. Further, as per sub-section

AL-RABIA MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL WELFARE & TRUST,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 283/PAT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

section 143(2) was issued or not; whether the assessee has filed its regular return of income or not. The assessment order straightway commenced from the factum of carrying out a survey upon the premises of the assessee and thereafter reproduced the final survey report submitted to ld. CCIT, Patna. This letter is reproduced from first page of the assessment

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

19 (SC)]. Therefore, such order passed is bad in law. 3. That the assessment order which made is bad in law. A notice u/s 142(1) dated 29/06/2021 was issued asking to furnish the return as was asked for through the Notice The whole order is bad in law and not prepared on facts requires to deleted for that early

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

19 (SC)]. Therefore, such order passed is bad in law. 3. That the assessment order which made is bad in law. A notice u/s 142(1) dated 29/06/2021 was issued asking to furnish the return as was asked for through the Notice The whole order is bad in law and not prepared on facts requires to deleted for that early

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S R.P.RAI ESTATE PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 28/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur M/S. R.P. Rai Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs 19, Goharua, Patliputra Colony, Patliputra, Patna- 800013. Pan: Aaccr 4972 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit, Dr Respondent By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.06.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate
Section 143(2)

TDS” followed by notices issued u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act. In response to notices, the assessee has appeared time to time before the AO and furnished copy of audit report of business activities, bank statements, books of account, details of sundry creditors and payment certificate and a copy of 26AS statement. On examination of the various documents

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 124/PAT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)

2,93,160/- is liable to be confirmed. Ground 11 regarding TDS deductible under chapter XVII-B on account of advertisement a/c of Rs. 18,91,877/-. The A.O has made the addition amount of Rs. 18,91,877/- with stating that assessee missed to deduct tax on payment under the head of advertisement/promotion amounting