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.

6 results for “TDS”+ Section 87clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,285Mumbai1,253Bangalore513Chennai313Kolkata292Hyderabad197Ahmedabad164Indore162Jaipur126Karnataka121Chandigarh72Cochin66Raipur50Pune48Rajkot43Lucknow33Surat28Visakhapatnam27Jodhpur26Guwahati20Ranchi18Kerala17Agra15Cuttack14Nagpur14Telangana10Amritsar9Dehradun8Allahabad6Patna6SC6Varanasi5Jabalpur2Calcutta2Panaji2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)10Section 271(1)(c)6Addition to Income6Section 2505Section 142(1)5Natural Justice4Penalty4Section 1443Section 54F3Section 147

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

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

ITA 10/PAT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(b)Section 40A(3)

section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of the notices at the end of the assessee. Ultimately the ld. Assessing Officer gone through the books of account submitted before her and made these two additions by recording the following finding:- “Addition u/s 40A(3) for payments exceeding Rs.20,000/- through bearer cheques:- On perusal of Books

SEEMA SRIVASTAVA,PATNA vs. ITO,DC/AC-6, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

3
Section 234B3
TDS3
ITA 715/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed
ITAT Patna
06 Jun 2025
AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 250(2)Section 48Section 54Section 54F

sections. 9. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with documents and evidences on or before date of hearing. 10. For that the appellant may be given opportunity of personal hearing physically/virtually at the time of hearing of the appeal. 11. For that the whole order is bad in fact

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)

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

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,PATNA, PATNA vs. PARTH ASHRAM EDU SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

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

ITA 444/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 292C

87,347/- while the same had been shown in the return of income at ₹7,91,32,299/- and the difference of ₹3,77,55,048/- was added to the income of the assessee. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and also claimed the expenditure recorded in the impounded documents