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 254(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai830Delhi517Bangalore341Chennai146Kolkata124Surat115Cochin112Karnataka88Chandigarh64Jaipur58Hyderabad44Raipur41Indore37Ahmedabad36Pune23Lucknow13Nagpur12Rajkot8Allahabad7Amritsar7Guwahati6Visakhapatnam5Cuttack5Ranchi5SC5Jabalpur4Telangana3Varanasi3Agra3Panaji2Himachal Pradesh2Patna1Punjab & Haryana1Calcutta1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 271C24Section 194A6Section 2016TDS5Disallowance4Section 403Section 273B3Deduction3Penalty3Limitation/Time-bar

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JT. CIT, TDS,, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 75/RAN/2024[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

1. That all these 3 appeals involves a common issue i.e. imposition of penalty U/s 271C by Ld JCIT - TDS Dhanbad, vide order dated 01/05/2018 (parallel orders for each year) and same being confirmed by CIT(A) NFAC vide order dated 30/01/2024 (parallel orders for each year). 2. That at the very outset we challenge the very initiation

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,,DHANBAD vs. JCIT, TDS CIRCLE,, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

3
Addition to Income2
ITA 76/RAN/2024[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

1. That all these 3 appeals involves a common issue i.e. imposition of penalty U/s 271C by Ld JCIT - TDS Dhanbad, vide order dated 01/05/2018 (parallel orders for each year) and same being confirmed by CIT(A) NFAC vide order dated 30/01/2024 (parallel orders for each year). 2. That at the very outset we challenge the very initiation

M/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED,DHANBAD vs. JCIT TDS, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 77/RAN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 40

1. That all these 3 appeals involves a common issue i.e. imposition of penalty U/s 271C by Ld JCIT - TDS Dhanbad, vide order dated 01/05/2018 (parallel orders for each year) and same being confirmed by CIT(A) NFAC vide order dated 30/01/2024 (parallel orders for each year). 2. That at the very outset we challenge the very initiation

SHRI KIRTIMAN SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT, RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 122/RAN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) Shri Kirtiman Singh, D.C.I.T., 357/A, Professor Colony, Karam Toli, Circle-2, Vs. Behind Abhilasha Building, Morabadi, Ranchi. Ranchi-834001. Pan No. Awmps 5592 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 131Section 133ASection 145(3)

1. For that ld. AO made an estimate of profit at 10% which was reduced to 8% by ld. CIT(A). The turnover of Rs.2,00,97,709/- was accepted. The appellant has maintained audited books of accounts which was verifiable in past, the book result disclosed was accepted. Ld. AO was, therefore, not justified in making an estimate

SHAH BROTHERS,CHAIBASA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 134/RAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshah Brothers, A.C.I.T., Thana Lane, Chaibasa-833201 Central Circle-1, Vs. (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aazfs 7498 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)

1. I have carefully considered the submissions of the Ld. ARs as against the observations made by the Id. AO in the impugned order. In the assessment order the Id. AO observed that during the relevant year the appellant had made contractual payment of Rs.34,01,811/- to M/s Rajshila Nirman Pvt Ltd. (‘RNPL’). He further observed that information