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.

3 results for “TDS”+ Section 220(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi583Patna469Mumbai391Bangalore149Pune114Hyderabad97Chennai93Karnataka91Visakhapatnam57Kolkata54Jaipur51Cochin48Raipur33Lucknow32Chandigarh31Ahmedabad28Indore28Nagpur19Rajkot10Kerala8Amritsar5Ranchi5Agra4Jodhpur4Surat3Cuttack3SC2Dehradun2Varanasi2Telangana1Rajasthan1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 687Section 271(1)(c)6Section 10(5)3Section 143(3)2Unexplained Cash Credit2TDS2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

RAJ KISHORE PRASAD,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 146/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.146/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Hearing) Raj Kishore Prasad, Vs. The Ito, 201, 2Nd Floor, Devashish Complex, Ward-3, Nr. Regenta Central Antarim Hotel, Valsad Off Cg Road, Ahmedabad "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aitpp0535A (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 10(5)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

TDS Valsad on 13th Jan, 2015 treating the assessee in default for non- deduction of tax from the payment made for LTC/LFC on visiting abroad. During the course of penalty proceedings the joint CIT has stated that assessee has failed to furnish any satisfactory reason/explanation for not deducting tax, therefore, he has levied penalty of Rs.1,70,220/- u/s. 271C

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

TDS) 4 Ajay AADHA2 - 0 10500 1421 - 5 Kejriwa 805E 3667 0 3 15588 l (HUF) 1 4 4 Anup AADHA3 0 0 15200 1484 - 6 Kejriwa 790G 0 2 16642 l HUF 4 Hinddus ADLPK44 - 4300 13600 1286 - 7 tan 27F 6536 000 000 451 17123 Industri 800 251 es (Prop Anilku mar Kejriwa l 4 Sanjay AJLPK38

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J B SYNTEX PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.140/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcj9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

220 (Delhi) (HC)] 13. DCIT vs. Rohini Builders [SLP CC515 of2002 (SC)] 14. DCIT vs. Rohini Builders [(2002) 256 ITR 0360 (Guj HC)] 15. CIT v/s Ujala Dyeing and Printing Mills (P) Ltd. [(SLP SC [317 ITR (ST.)(1)] 16. CIT v/s Ujala Dyeing and Printing Mills (P) Ltd. [328 ITR 437 (Guj HC)] 17. Principal