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.

195 results for “TDS”+ Section 250(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,495Delhi831Bangalore569Kolkata441Chennai320Pune296Raipur262Ahmedabad244Patna195Hyderabad157Jaipur155Cochin110Nagpur87Karnataka85Chandigarh80Lucknow72Rajkot69Indore62Surat61Visakhapatnam44Guwahati43Amritsar42Panaji30Jodhpur27Agra20Jabalpur20Ranchi18Cuttack16Dehradun14Allahabad9SC3Telangana3Varanasi1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

TDS92Section 25041Section 194C29Section 201(1)22Section 14720Addition to Income20Deduction12Natural Justice11Section 142(1)10Section 148

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(1) PATNA, PATNA

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

ITA 330/PAT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

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

Showing 1–20 of 195 · Page 1 of 10

...
10
Section 15410
Section 271(1)(b)9
ITA 335/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, P)ATNA

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

ITA 333/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

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

ITA 331/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

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

ITA 332/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, COR-2, PATNA

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

ITA 334/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 80I

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) for Assessment Year 2012-13 by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 02/08/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under

MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 29/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bedi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Lalita Kumari, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44

1 Cr., therefore, the provision of section 44AD of the Act are not applicable. The assessee has not filed any evidence like purchase, sale bills or the details of TDS/TCS, if any, for the business of liquor nor even the copy of license in the name of Shri Om Prakash Bhagat and copy of any agreement with Shri Om Prakash

HARIHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 4 (4), PATNA

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

ITA 268/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54BSection 54FSection 96

1) and (2) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 3. For that the computation of capital gain and levy of tax against the appellant of Rs.2,41,50,000/- is bad and illegal in view of the fact that as per the notification/press release issued by the executive engineer, PWD, Hilsa, Nalanda, the land in question

GUPTA JI BROTHERS RICE PRIVATE LIMITED,DALMIA NAGAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3, GAYA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 33/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 194CSection 194HSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereafter ‘the Ld. CIT(A)], vide order dated 21.12.2022. 1.1 In this case, the assessee filed its return of income on 26.11.2014 for the assessment year under consideration and after detailed I.T.A. No. 33/Pat/2023 Gupta

RAVINDRA KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-4(5), PATNA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 474/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 143Section 143(1)

TDS were deducted on individual PAN, therefore, the assessee had filed statement of deduction of tax on individual pan. The return of the appellant was processed by CPC and 2 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Rabindra Kumar order under section 143 (1) (a) Was passed. In the intimation, the whole of the contract receipt were taken as income under other source

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

250 of the I.T act, 1961(herein referred to as 'the act'). 2. For that the grounds of appeals are without prejudice to one another. 3. For that the learned commissioner of income tax (Appeals) had erred in consideration of the fact and the law that the notice u/s 148 of the act had been served to the appellant

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)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2016-17 dated 11.02.2025, which have been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, and penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) I.T.A. Nos.: 216, 217 & 218/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Yadav and 271(1

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

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2016-17 dated 11.02.2025, which have been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, and penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) I.T.A. Nos.: 216, 217 & 218/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Yadav and 271(1

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)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2016-17 dated 11.02.2025, which have been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, and penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) I.T.A. Nos.: 216, 217 & 218/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Yadav and 271(1

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

ITA 281/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37Section 69A

250 of I.T.A. No.: 281/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pavan Kumar Bhagat. the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) by the ld. First Appellate Authority, viz. the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) at National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is bad both in law and on facts. 3. For that the order of assessment dated 28/11/2019 bearing

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

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

ITA 94/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 250Section 253(3)

1) That an appeal against the order passed under section 250 by NFAC, Delhi uploaded on 25/08/2021 is being filed today. 2) That as per the normal calculation the limitation prescribed under section 253(3) of Sixty days has expired. However, as decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in the order

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

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

ITA 93/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 250Section 253(3)

1) That an appeal against the order passed under section 250 by NFAC, Delhi uploaded on 25/08/2021 is being filed today. 2) That as per the normal calculation the limitation prescribed under section 253(3) of Sixty days has expired. However, as decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in the order

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

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

ITA 91/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 250Section 253(3)

1) That an appeal against the order passed under section 250 by NFAC, Delhi uploaded on 25/08/2021 is being filed today. 2) That as per the normal calculation the limitation prescribed under section 253(3) of Sixty days has expired. However, as decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in the order

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

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

ITA 92/PAT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 250Section 253(3)

1) That an appeal against the order passed under section 250 by NFAC, Delhi uploaded on 25/08/2021 is being filed today. 2) That as per the normal calculation the limitation prescribed under section 253(3) of Sixty days has expired. However, as decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in the order

PUNAM HISARIA,SITAMARHI vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-03, DARBH, DARBH

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

ITA 80/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.80/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Punam Hisaria ………. Appellant (Pan: Abupa3945R)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 250Section 40

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the “Act”) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), Patna-3 [in short Ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 25.01.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act by DC/AC, circle-3, Darbh dated 28.12.2019. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: I.T.A. No. 80/Pat/2023