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 45clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,874Delhi1,798Bangalore985Chennai636Kolkata412Hyderabad232Ahmedabad221Indore194Chandigarh169Karnataka168Jaipur168Cochin151Pune120Raipur106Visakhapatnam70Surat63Lucknow53Cuttack48Rajkot41Ranchi39Nagpur31Guwahati23Amritsar21Patna19Telangana15Jodhpur15Dehradun13Jabalpur11Allahabad11Agra10SC9Kerala8Panaji8Varanasi6Uttarakhand3Himachal Pradesh2Bombay1Rajasthan1J&K1Calcutta1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income3Section 1732

Hari Mohan Sarswat vs. DCIT CIRCLE

ITA/42/2015HC Uttarakhand05 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

Section 173

45 years of age and was an Advocate by 3 profession, and according to the plea of income, which was accruing to him, he claims that he was earning an amount of about Rs.20,000/- per month approximately. Apart from the injuries which were suffered by the claimants, the other two co-passengers too, who travelling in the Car, were

M/S SIEM OFFSHORE INC. vs. The Deputy Director Of Income Tax

ITA/43/2015HC Uttarakhand24 Nov 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDRA MAITHANI

Section 173

45 years of age and was an Advocate by 3 profession, and according to the plea of income, which was accruing to him, he claims that he was earning an amount of about Rs.20,000/- per month approximately. Apart from the injuries which were suffered by the claimants, the other two co-passengers too, who travelling in the Car, were

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION vs. M/S DEEPWATER PACIFIC 1 INC

ITA/11/2022HC Uttarakhand02 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE

Section 31Section 53

45,435/- 1,26,909.15 4. Hence, the total tax payable was held to be Rs. 1,26,909.15. 5. In the facts of the present case, the Tax Assessing Officer vide order dated 15.11.2016 held that the respondent was a trader and after mining the goods, was selling sand, concrete, grid, etc. As per the Report received from