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.

5 results for “TDS”+ Section 140clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi376Mumbai359Bangalore291Chandigarh102Kolkata100Karnataka85Chennai75Cochin66Ahmedabad66Jaipur55Pune51Hyderabad41Raipur41Indore35Lucknow32Visakhapatnam28Nagpur16Surat13Cuttack12Dehradun11Rajkot10Agra6Ranchi5Amritsar4Patna4Varanasi4Panaji3Uttarakhand2SC2Jodhpur1Telangana1Guwahati1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)9Section 1479Section 2634Deduction4TDS4Section 37(1)3Section 1483Section 403Reopening of Assessment3

ITO WARD-1(40, JSR vs. M/S ANAND VIHAR CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, JSR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 335/RAN/2017[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2014-2015 Ito, Ward-1(4), Jamshedpur Vs M/S Anand Vihar Construction Pvt. Ltd., 12A, Rajendra Nagar, Near Durga Puja Maidan, Sakchi, Jamshedpur- 831001 Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R Respondent (Appellant) .. & Co No.02/Ran/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-2015 M/S Anand Vihar Construction Vs Ito, Ward-1(4), Pvt. Ltd., Jamshedpur 12A, Rajendra Nagar, Near Durga Puja Maidan, Sakchi, Jamshedpur-831001 Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R Respondent (Appellant) .. Revenue By Shri A.K.Mohanty,Jcit(Jr. Dr) Assessee By Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv. Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2018

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

TDS was deducted over it. No reply for the above was furnished by the assessee. Hence, the same is disallowed because as the provisions of section 40(a)(ai) of the I.T.Act,1961 same is disallowable expenditure. Further as the details & ledger furnished by the assessee under the head Architect Drawing & MAP Approval are contradictory to each other

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 and set aside the order of Assessing Officer and directed him to make a fresh assessment considering the findings on the issues discussed on each issue and the conclusions drawn. 5. Aggrieved by the order of ld. PCIT, this appeal by the assessee, has been preferred before us. During the appellate proceedings before

HEC LTD,FINANCE &ACCOUNTS,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 232/RAN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Indrajit Singh, CIT/ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

TDS was not deducted the company has added back the entire expenses which is evident from Tax Audit report in Form 3CD (clause 27(a)). The details were available in the schedules to the Audit Report. It is also not correct to say that any and every expense for sales promotion would be of such nature as to require deduction

DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI vs. M/S HEC LTD, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 95/RAN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Indrajit Singh, CIT/ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

TDS was not deducted the company has added back the entire expenses which is evident from Tax Audit report in Form 3CD (clause 27(a)). The details were available in the schedules to the Audit Report. It is also not correct to say that any and every expense for sales promotion would be of such nature as to require deduction

HEC LTD,FINANCE &ACCOUNTS,RANCHI vs. ACIT,CIR-1, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 231/RAN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Indrajit Singh, CIT/ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

TDS was not deducted the company has added back the entire expenses which is evident from Tax Audit report in Form 3CD (clause 27(a)). The details were available in the schedules to the Audit Report. It is also not correct to say that any and every expense for sales promotion would be of such nature as to require deduction