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 133clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,060Delhi773Bangalore347Kolkata287Chennai194Ahmedabad130Karnataka117Jaipur113Raipur97Indore66Chandigarh65Cochin61Pune55Surat54Hyderabad46Visakhapatnam38Lucknow31Agra20Nagpur20Rajkot15Patna14Guwahati12Amritsar10Dehradun9Ranchi8Varanasi7Panaji6Cuttack5Allahabad4Jabalpur3Telangana3SC2Jodhpur2Calcutta1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 2605Deduction2TDS2

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/438/2012HC Telangana06 Nov 2012

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 260

Section 133-A of the Act, it was found by the authorities that the assessee has not deducted TDS on the amount

Late Smt. Hoorjahan Begum vs. Tghe Income Tax Officer

Appeal stands disposed off

ITTA/448/2015HC Telangana07 Dec 2015

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,S.RAVI KUMAR

133, para 20) “20. Generally, the actual income of the deceased less income tax should be the starting point for calculating the compensation.” This Court further observed that: (SCC p. 134, para 24) “24. … Where the annual income is in taxable range, the words „actual salary‟ should be read as „actual salary less tax‟.” Therefore, it is clear that

M/S. SREE TRADING CORPORATION vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), HYDERABAD

ITTA/205/2006HC Telangana01 Feb 2023

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

For Appellant: Ms. I.Maamu VaniFor Respondent: Mr. J.V.Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 260A

133(6) of the Act. All the four transporters (creditors) denied that the above outstanding credits were receivable by them from the appellant. In addition to that, Mr. Kuldip Vasta, proprietor of M/s. Trans India Express recorded a statement under Section 131(1)(b) of the Act on 16.02.2004. In the said statement, he denied that appellant was required