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.

5 results for “TDS”+ Section 234Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi884Mumbai785Bangalore414Ahmedabad103Kolkata98Hyderabad78Chennai67Jaipur54Pune51Chandigarh32Karnataka29Indore23Agra22Visakhapatnam17Ranchi16Dehradun14Surat12Cochin12Lucknow8Rajkot7Nagpur7Cuttack6Allahabad5Patna5Raipur5Jabalpur4Guwahati2Telangana2Jodhpur2SC1Panaji1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)9Section 271(1)(c)6Section 234B4Addition to Income4Section 2503Section 1473Section 142(1)3Penalty3TDS3Natural Justice

ITO, WARD-4(1), PATNA vs. HEMANT KUMAR DAS, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 97/PAT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

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

Section 143(3)

TDS. The ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that claim of these liabilities can only be allowed, if they are actually discharged by the assessee. Since the assessee failed to prove actual payment of these dues, the ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the claim. The stand of the assessee is that certain issues were under litigation and did not attain

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 216/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

3
Disallowance2
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

TDS on rent is wrong, illegal and unjustified on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 6. For that the Ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred in affirming charging interest u/s 234B amounting to Rs.3,94,200/- which is bad in fact and law of the case. 7. For that the appellant may not be treated as assessee

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 218/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

TDS on rent is wrong, illegal and unjustified on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 6. For that the Ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred in affirming charging interest u/s 234B amounting to Rs.3,94,200/- which is bad in fact and law of the case. 7. For that the appellant may not be treated as assessee

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 217/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

TDS on rent is wrong, illegal and unjustified on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 6. For that the Ld. CIT (A) NFAC has erred in affirming charging interest u/s 234B amounting to Rs.3,94,200/- which is bad in fact and law of the case. 7. For that the appellant may not be treated as assessee

SUNYNA KUMAR GUPTA,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/PAT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 90/Pat./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sunyna Kumari Gupta, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Prop: M/S Sona Drug Agency, Tax, Circle-4, Road No. 1, Lohanipur, Rajendra Patna Nagar, Patna-800016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Addpg6521C Assessee By : Sh. K. N. Prasad, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Abhay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement :16 .03.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.02.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Patna.

For Appellant: Sh. K. N. Prasad, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Abhay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 234ASection 234BSection 234D

234B, u/s 234D and 244A is arbitrary and unjust. 5. For that the appellant reserves her right to file detailed submission at the time of hearing. 6. For that the appellant craves leave to urge, add or alter any other ground or grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. Ground Nos. 1, 5 & 6 raised by the assessee are general