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 133clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai982Delhi755Bangalore336Kolkata283Chennai185Ahmedabad170Jaipur127Karnataka117Raipur107Pune97Indore86Chandigarh72Cochin64Surat61Hyderabad55Visakhapatnam44Lucknow34Rajkot22Agra20Nagpur20Cuttack18Amritsar17Patna14Guwahati14Dehradun9Varanasi7Ranchi6Panaji6Allahabad4Telangana3Jabalpur3Jodhpur2SC2Calcutta1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 26311Section 153A7Section 143(3)4Addition to Income4TDS3Section 133(6)2Section 1472Section 682Section 1332Section 133A2Revision u/s 2632Deduction2

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR vs. BENKO TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 436/RAN/2024[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.436/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Cc, Jamshedpur…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant Vs. Benko Traders Pvt. Ltd....………...….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent 119, 4Th Floor, Block D, White House, Park Stree, Wb – 700016. [Pan: Aabcb1888R] Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna For The Assessment Year 2015–16 Dated 25.09.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139 Of The Act Declaring A Total Income As Nil. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1). Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & An Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 28.11.2017 Determining The Total Income At ₹9,88,28,406. Based On Information Received From The Investigation Wing, Mumbai, Relating To Alleged Use Of Stock Exchange Platform (Bse/Nse) For Generating Fictitious Long-Term/Short-Term Capital Gains Through Certain Scripts & Alleged Accommodation Entries, The Assessing Officer Recorded Reasons Under Section 147 Of The Act. A Notice Under Section 148 Was Issued The Assessee Filed Its Return Declaring The Same Income

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

133(6) of the IT Act. Further, it is also noticed that the AO has not made inquiries with the bank to get the cash trail to arrive at the conclusion that the assessee has received funds of rs.59,00,000/- during the year from dubious entities namely M/s. Bangbhumi Highrise Pvt Ltd and M/s. TallandDatasoft Pvt Ltd wherein

ITO, TDS, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHHINAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT PVT. LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 18/RAN/2022[16-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 May 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 133Section 133A

133(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 29.01.2019, the statement of Shri Dinesh Kumar Choudhary, the Accountant of the petitioner assessee categorically admitted that while making payments to various transporters, no TDS was deducted barring a few entities and no PAN details and declaration from the transporters having less than 10 vehicles/ carriers were collected. He also admitted

ITO, TDS,, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHINNAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 17/RAN/2022[15-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 May 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 133Section 133A

133(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 29.01.2019, the statement of Shri Dinesh Kumar Choudhary, the Accountant of the petitioner assessee categorically admitted that while making payments to various transporters, no TDS was deducted barring a few entities and no PAN details and declaration from the transporters having less than 10 vehicles/ carriers were collected. He also admitted

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD., DHANBAD vs. NEW SATNAM TRASPORT CO., DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 11/RAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayd.C.I.T., New Satman Transport Company, Circle-1, Matkuria, Dhanbad-826001. Vs. Dhanbad. Pan No. Aagfn 7540 N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 133(6)

Section 133(6) had been issued to the some of the parties and as they had not responded to the same, an amount of ₹ 2.04 crores had been disallowed. It was a submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 3. We have considered the submissions

DEVPRABHA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD.,,DHANBAD vs. PCIT, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Devprabha Construction Private Ltd., P.C.I.T., Dev Villa, Behind Radha Swamy Arcade, Dhanbad, Vs. Saraidhela, Dhanbad-828127. Aayakar Bhawan, Luby Pan No. Aaecb 2652 A Circular Road, Dhanbad-826001 (Jharkhand) Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263

section 263 of the Act. f) That as such, the allegation of the PCIT that the AO has only looked into 5 persons/entities out of the 7 persons to whom hire charges was paid without deduction of TDS is factually incorrect. 4. That with respect to the 2nd issue i.e. hire charges paid to related persons

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/RAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Chaudhury & Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

section 142(1) of the Act, dated 20.06.2016, which were furnished by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, the copy of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act is reproduced below for ready reference: “Sub: Income Tax assessment in your case AY 2012-13 notice u/s 142(1) reg. Following details / explanations / clarifications may be furnished on or before