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.

69 results for “TDS”+ Section 145(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai539Delhi457Kolkata222Bangalore199Chennai136Ahmedabad125Jaipur119Chandigarh115Karnataka114Hyderabad105Cochin86Pune75Raipur69Visakhapatnam40Lucknow38Indore36Amritsar35Surat31Ranchi30Agra23Rajkot23Jodhpur16Cuttack16Allahabad13Nagpur12Dehradun12Guwahati10Patna8Varanasi6Panaji3SC2Jabalpur2Calcutta2J&K1

Key Topics

Section 234E210Addition to Income50Section 40A(3)30TDS30Disallowance28Section 271(1)(c)26Depreciation19Penalty13Section 6811Section 143(2)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR vs. PSA CONSTRUCTION, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 145/RPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 250(4)Section 253

145(3) of the Act showing net profit @8% of the total turnover. It was the observation of the ld. AO that during the survey proceedings, the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunity/time to produce the books of accounts supporting with vouchers and other documents but the assessee was failed to comply with the same. During the assessment proceedings

MOHAMMED USMAN, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

Showing 1–20 of 69 · Page 1 of 4

8
Section 143(3)6
Section 1446

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RPR/2026[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.180/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohammed Usman C/25, Nandini Road, Power House, Bhilai-490 011, Dist. Durg Pan: Aafpu9292H

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 and (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, the said delay of 58 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 5. In this case, the assessee has filed both legal grounds as well

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 47/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3 Janta Industries Vs. ITO (TDS)/CPC, Bengaluru ITA Nos. 46 & 47/RPR/2026 6. We have heard the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR and considered the written submissions filed by the assessee. We find that this issue had come up for adjudication before the Raipur Bench in a series of cases of Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank Vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOMETAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 46/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3 Janta Industries Vs. ITO (TDS)/CPC, Bengaluru ITA Nos. 46 & 47/RPR/2026 6. We have heard the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR and considered the written submissions filed by the assessee. We find that this issue had come up for adjudication before the Raipur Bench in a series of cases of Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank Vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS

MESERS JAGDISH EARTHCON SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS , BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 50/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS SRISHTI INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 49/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESSERS HILL BROW METALLICS & CONSTTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 35/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 42/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 43/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL LLP,PATHALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 41/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS ARYA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 46/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS ARYA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 45/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS ARYA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 47/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS NEERA CONSTRUCTION,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 48/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESSERS HILL BROW METALLICS & CONSTTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 34/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 44/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUSHIL MITTAL,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 36/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

MESERS JAGDISH EARTHCON SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 51/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL LLP,PATHALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 40/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings

SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGRAWAL LLP,PATHALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, , BILASPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 39/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 34 & 35/Rpr/2019 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Section 234E

3. The brief facts in ITA No. 34/RPR/2019 are that the assessee filed its TDS return late and therefore, the Assessing Officer imposed late filing fee of Rs.1,75,340/- u/s.234E of the Act. 6 Group of cases U/s.234E 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the order under the aforesaid section. In the course of Appellate Proceedings