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.

63 results for “TDS”+ Section 249clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai321Delhi270Chennai131Bangalore108Karnataka89Raipur63Chandigarh60Kolkata52Cochin51Jaipur43Ahmedabad37Pune30Hyderabad30Indore23Surat22Lucknow21Visakhapatnam17Amritsar9Cuttack7Rajkot6Agra4Varanasi4Nagpur3Guwahati3Jodhpur2Panaji2Telangana2Dehradun1Patna1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)95Addition to Income53TDS48Deduction30Section 271(1)(c)26Penalty26Section 143(3)25Natural Justice25Section 25022Disallowance

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 230/RPR/2023[2015-16 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4

22
Section 249(3)20
Section 80P19

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 229/RPR/2023[2015-16 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 227/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Third Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 231/RPR/2023[2016-17 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 228/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Fourth Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 226/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

Section provides as follows: - Form of appeal and limitation. "249. (1) Every appeal under this Chapter shall be in the prescribed form 61-and shall be verified in the prescribed manner 7[and shall, in case of an appeal made to the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the 1st day of October, 4 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS

VEER PROJECTS,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 654/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 654/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 249(2)Section 250Section 68

TDS 5,059 Difference in income as per 26AS and P&L Rs. 4516001 Total Rs. 1,50,16,117 Disallowances as discussed above u/s 68 of the Act and taxable at special Rate u/s 115BBE 1. Unsecured Loan 2,63,43,671 1. Sundry Creditors 2,56,47,012 Total assessed Income Rs.6,70,06,800 4. Aggrieved with

RAJESH KUMAR SINGHANIA HUF,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 848/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.848/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Singhania Huf B-22/12, Sector-3, Udaya Society, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aadhr1548F

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)

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, we condone the delay of 30 days involved in the present appeal and the matter is heard on merits. 4. That the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had dismissed

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 517/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) 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 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 516/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) 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 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGOAN,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 518/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) 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 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

DISTRICT PROJECT LIVELIHOOD COLLEGE SOCIETY,GARIYABANDH(CG) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 271/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 271, 272 & 273/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)

TDS), Raipur section 249(3) of the Act and the delay is attributable to the negligence and inaction on the part

DISTRICT PROJECT LIVELIHOOD COLLEGE SOCIETY,GARIYABANDH (C.G) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),RAIPUR, AYKAR BHAWAN

ITA 272/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 271, 272 & 273/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)

TDS), Raipur section 249(3) of the Act and the delay is attributable to the negligence and inaction on the part

DISTRICT PROJECT LIVELIHOOD COLLEGE SOCIETY,GARIYABANDH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 273/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 271, 272 & 273/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Chhabda, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 254(2)

TDS), Raipur section 249(3) of the Act and the delay is attributable to the negligence and inaction on the part

RAJMAL JAIN, BASTAR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 20/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 23/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 21/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 24/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (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 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker