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.

172 results for “TDS”+ Section 22clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,011Delhi2,975Bangalore1,567Chennai1,095Kolkata698Pune539Hyderabad468Indore423Ahmedabad394Jaipur282Cochin236Raipur224Karnataka221Chandigarh205Patna172Visakhapatnam146Nagpur127Surat107Lucknow85Rajkot84Cuttack63Dehradun48Ranchi46Amritsar41Panaji32Guwahati32Agra30Jodhpur27Telangana27Allahabad26Jabalpur22SC14Varanasi12Kerala10Calcutta5Orissa2Uttarakhand2Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1J&K1

Key Topics

TDS97Section 153C4Section 1534Addition to Income3Section 1322

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

22,750/-. An audit was conducted for the said year and it was found that the assessee had shown freight charges amounting to ₹61,12,102/- out of which on an amount of ₹54,59,700/-, the assessee had not deducted any TDS u/s 194C of the Act relating to payment made to the contractors. It was also found that

Showing 1–20 of 172 · Page 1 of 9

...

INDIAN PAC CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 32/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(1)Section 144ASection 194CSection 263

22,14,719/-. This return was processed under section 143(1). Later on, it was selected for scrutiny assessment. The ld. Assessing Officer has accepted the return without discussing any of the issues and accepted loss declared by the assessee. 4. A perusal of the assessment record, ld. Pr. Commissioner formed an opinion that ld. Assessing Officer has not examined

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

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

22. For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the bench that along with the original grounds of appeal the additional grounds of appeal may be admitted, as the same goes to the root of the matter. Though Ld. DR opposed, we considering the judicial precedence

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BARE BHABUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 194/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BHABHUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 200/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BARE BHABUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 199/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BHABHUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 201/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BHABHUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 202/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BARE BHABUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 193/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,DIDKHILI BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 208/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BARE BHABUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 198/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,DIDKHILI BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 207/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,BARE BHABUA BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 197/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly

DAKSHIN BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,DUMRAON BRANCH vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee stand dismissed”

ITA 192/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 200A for computation of fee. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. Without going into the merits of the controversy, it is noticed that the appellant-assessee, in these appeals, has not challenged the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act, which in the lead case (ITA No. 34/Pat/2022) is dated 17.04.2015. Admittedly