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.

3 results for “TDS”+ Section 14clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,118Delhi4,070Bangalore2,100Chennai1,465Kolkata976Pune656Hyderabad576Ahmedabad518Raipur364Jaipur358Indore310Karnataka281Nagpur278Chandigarh277Cochin253Surat197Visakhapatnam171Rajkot128Lucknow92Cuttack85Amritsar79Dehradun53Ranchi49Jabalpur45Patna44Panaji42Jodhpur42Telangana40Agra38Guwahati34Allahabad26SC19Varanasi14Kerala12Calcutta12Himachal Pradesh8Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana3Uttarakhand3J&K2Orissa2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 2634Section 1942Section 11B2Section 11(1)(a)2TDS2

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS 2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/42/2021HC Punjab & Haryana10 Mar 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA

Section 194

TDS)-2, Chandigarh …Appellant Vs. M/s Vodafone Idea Limited (earlier known as Vodafone Mobile Services Limited). ….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Amanpreet Singh, Advocate for the appellant(s). *** LISA GILL , J. (ORAL) 1. All the above titled four appeals are being taken up together for hearing at request

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) GURUGRAM vs. M/S MAHARISHI MARKANDESHWAR UNIVERSITY TRUST

ITA/41/2021HC Punjab & Haryana24 Sept 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 11(1)(a)
Section 263

TDS in the payments and the entire accounts were fraudulent. 6. Learned counsel for the Revenue further submitted that the mess charges were actually not paid and the amount has been siphoned to constitute as mess expenses. It is her submission that the ITAT did not even bother to produce the investigation report prepared by the Inspector for the purpose

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. SH.RAVINDER SINGH NAGI PLOT NO. 797 JANTA LAND & PROMOTERS LTD SEC 90-91 GREATER MOHALI

ITA/46/2018HC Punjab & Haryana09 Sept 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Section 11BSection 83

TDS Management who were otherwise liable, also deposited the same amount of service tax on 07.04.2015, 03.07.2015 and 05.08.2015, in relation to the services provided. On coming to know, the appellant-company, therefore, moved appropriate application on 30.08.2016, seeking refund of the amount of tax paid to the Central Excise and Service Tax Division, Ambala City. They were asked