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.

15 results for “TDS”+ Section 193clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai324Delhi320Bangalore189Karnataka110Kolkata110Chennai72Ahmedabad52Jaipur50Chandigarh32Hyderabad20Raipur20Lucknow20Indore17Surat15Visakhapatnam12Dehradun12Rajkot11Cochin11Telangana11Pune9Guwahati9Nagpur8Cuttack4Amritsar3SC3Jodhpur2Allahabad1Calcutta1Varanasi1Agra1

Key Topics

Addition to Income15Section 6813Section 143(3)11Section 80P(2)(a)8Section 80P(2)(c)8Section 2017TDS6Disallowance6Deduction6Section 133(6)

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 131Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 68

section 143 (3) of the Act of even date. The learned counsel for the assessee referred point no. 9 at 13. Page No. 3 of appellate order wherein Ld. CIT (A) has mentioned the claim of the assessee that it is surprising that cash deposits of Rs. 15, 00,000/- in the case of M/s. Kejriwal Dyeing & Printing Mills

D V PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT

5
Section 2634
Section 80P(2)(A)4

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 121/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) D. V. Properties Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit - 1, 748-749, Golden Plaza Market, Surat. Ring Road, Surat – 395002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8392B (Appellant) (Respondent) Ms Chaitali Shah, Ca Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 19/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2023

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)Section 43B

section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2018-19, on the following grounds: “1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s. 263, although the assessment order passed

ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), SURAT vs. M/S. SATYAM ENTERPRISE, SURAT

In the result, this part of issue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 169/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) I.T.O., M/S Satyam Enterprise, Ward- 3(3)(4), 182-Thakordwar Society, Nr. Vs. Surat. Spinning Mill, Varachha Road, Surat. Pan No. Abvfs 5076 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 201Section 254(1)Section 40

TDS on Labour Contract Expenses, by observing that the said person has expired, without considering the fact that the assesse had not adhered to all the conditions of first proviso of Section 201 of the Income Tax Act,1961? 4. Whether, on the facts and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in restricting the disallowance

THE ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, SURAT vs. MICRO INKS LIMITED,, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2375/AHD/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2375/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, V Micro Inks Limited, (International Taxation), Surat. S. Bilakhia House, Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2707/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Micro Inks Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, Bilakhia House, Muktanand S. (International Taxation), Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. Surat. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Gopala Krishnan – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 14.02.2020

Section 201Section 5Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vb)

TDS on such payments, claiming the income to the recipient is not arisen in India, is erroneous understanding of income recognition principle. 11.4 Going further to this, in different situation, assume that, payment was made by some offshore entity to any person outside India, on behalf of a resident company. And if such expenses are debited and claimed

MICRO INKS PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS MICRO INKS LTD.),VAPI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ( INTL. TAXN.), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2707/AHD/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2375/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, V Micro Inks Limited, (International Taxation), Surat. S. Bilakhia House, Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2707/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Micro Inks Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, Bilakhia House, Muktanand S. (International Taxation), Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. Surat. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Gopala Krishnan – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 14.02.2020

Section 201Section 5Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vb)

TDS on such payments, claiming the income to the recipient is not arisen in India, is erroneous understanding of income recognition principle. 11.4 Going further to this, in different situation, assume that, payment was made by some offshore entity to any person outside India, on behalf of a resident company. And if such expenses are debited and claimed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NA vs. ARIVS.GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 129/SRT/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

193 PER THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO LESS: ADMMIN EXPENSES 7,77,548 OF TILLER DIVISION LESS CONSIDERED TWICE 1,19,81,645 TIME DONATION RS.10,17,000/- TDS RS.1,82,119/- POWER TILLER REBATE RS.14,000/- FBT EXPENSES RS.6,610/- 12,19,729 1,07,61,916 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER RS.5,35,43,908/- TILLER

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NA vs. ARIVS.GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 130/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

193 PER THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO LESS: ADMMIN EXPENSES 7,77,548 OF TILLER DIVISION LESS CONSIDERED TWICE 1,19,81,645 TIME DONATION RS.10,17,000/- TDS RS.1,82,119/- POWER TILLER REBATE RS.14,000/- FBT EXPENSES RS.6,610/- 12,19,729 1,07,61,916 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER RS.5,35,43,908/- TILLER

GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 137/SRT/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

193 PER THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO LESS: ADMMIN EXPENSES 7,77,548 OF TILLER DIVISION LESS CONSIDERED TWICE 1,19,81,645 TIME DONATION RS.10,17,000/- TDS RS.1,82,119/- POWER TILLER REBATE RS.14,000/- FBT EXPENSES RS.6,610/- 12,19,729 1,07,61,916 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER RS.5,35,43,908/- TILLER

GANDEVI TALUKA KHEDUT SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 138/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(A)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

193 PER THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO LESS: ADMMIN EXPENSES 7,77,548 OF TILLER DIVISION LESS CONSIDERED TWICE 1,19,81,645 TIME DONATION RS.10,17,000/- TDS RS.1,82,119/- POWER TILLER REBATE RS.14,000/- FBT EXPENSES RS.6,610/- 12,19,729 1,07,61,916 2) AGRICULTURAL ITEMS EXEMPT ACTIVITY – POWER RS.5,35,43,908/- TILLER

AVLON SYNTEX PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1052/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A.No.1052/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Avlon Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Deputy Commissioner 2Nd Floor, Vishwakarma Chambers, . Of Income Tax, Majuragate, Ring Road, Surat – 395002. Circle-1, Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aacca 0034 B] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Prasoon Kabra - Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Vepari – CAFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra - Sr.DR
Section 131

TDS on the entire amount paid to M/s.SRM Logistics for which separate addition have made. The Assessing Officer noted that assessee has claimed commission expenses of Rs.69,47,904/- in the profit and loss account . It was found apparently abnormal for the assessee company to have incurred such commission expenses of Rs.69,47,904/- against the total turnover of Rs.2.08

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. GROWTH AVENUES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the department stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1868/AHD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2003-04 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S Growth Avenues Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), 409, Super Tex Tower, Surat. Opp. Kinnery Cinema, Vs Ring Road, Surat-395002 (Pan: Aaacg8681Q) Appellant Respondent Department By : Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. Dr Assessee By: Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2019

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250(4)Section 40Section 43BSection 68

193/- Surveillance charges e) Claim regarding erosion in value - Rs. 7,34,415/- of shares f) Transaction charges - Rs. 44,38,411/- g) Equipment charges - Rs. 29,19,102/- h) Depreciation on assets - Rs. 3,86,511/- i) Cash credits added back u/s 68 - Rs. 66,26,600/- j) Penalty - Rs. 3,34,721/- 2.1 Aggrieved, the assessee approached

KSHITIJ MARINE SERVICES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.1(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 125/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr- DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

193 ITR 321 (SC). 9. The Ld. Counsel has also argued that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer collected material from third party, behind the back of the assessee, and no any opportunity for cross examination was provided to the assessee, therefore appeal of the assessee should be allowed on this ground also. 10. The Ld. Counsel has also

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S. SHAH VIRCHAND GOVANJI JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal raised by revenue is also dismissed

ITA 175/SRT/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Respondent: “1. On the facts and circumstances o
Section 254(1)Section 68

193 ITR 321 (SC) which has been followed in a series of decisions by the various High Courts including in a latest decision by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC) wherein it has been held that this Court (Hon’ble Apex Court) did not think it appropriate to allow

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S. SHAH VIRCHAND GOVANJI JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal raised by revenue is also dismissed

ITA 176/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Respondent: “1. On the facts and circumstances o
Section 254(1)Section 68

193 ITR 321 (SC) which has been followed in a series of decisions by the various High Courts including in a latest decision by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC) wherein it has been held that this Court (Hon’ble Apex Court) did not think it appropriate to allow

SHRI LALCHAND DHARIWAL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2623/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2623/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Shri Lalchand P. Dhariwal, Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/S. Adinath Textile , Ward- 1(2)(3) Surat O-21-23 Bombay Market Umarwada Surat Pan: Aatpd 0682 Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 68

section 68 by providing details to establish genuineness of transaction, identity and creditworthiness of depositors then the assessee is not expected to prove genuineness of cash deposited in bank account of those creditors because under the law the assessee can be asked to prove the source of credits in his books of accounts but not the source of source