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.

23 results for “TDS”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,327Delhi5,120Bangalore1,980Chennai1,834Kolkata1,681Ahmedabad1,069Hyderabad946Pune818Jaipur602Chandigarh501Raipur409Indore408Cochin344Cuttack313Surat287Visakhapatnam279Nagpur235Rajkot228Karnataka221Patna199Lucknow161Amritsar139Jabalpur123Ranchi94Jodhpur88Guwahati76Agra74Allahabad60Dehradun55Panaji54Telangana35Varanasi23SC16Calcutta15Kerala10Himachal Pradesh6Rajasthan6Orissa4Uttarakhand3Punjab & Haryana2J&K2Bombay1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)28Section 143(3)24Section 80I13Section 2(15)12Addition to Income12Section 14811Section 118Deduction8TDS8Section 143(2)

TULSIANI INFRAVENTURES PVT. LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VARANASI

In the result the addition of Rs

ITA 75/VNS/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi22 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklatulsiani Infrastructure Vs. Dc/Acit, Private Limited, 37, ‘Central Circle, Varanashi Elgin Road, Civil Lines, Aaykar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor Allahabad- 211001 Maqbool Alam Road, Varanasi - 221002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadct8858R Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : V.K. Jindal & Ashish Jindal Respondent By : Robin Chaudhary Date Of Hearing 27.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: (Jm): The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.05.2023, Passed By Cit (Appeals) Lucknow-3 For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed In Sec. 153 R.W.S 143(3) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In Various Grounds Of Appeal The Assessee Has Challenged The Addition Of Rs.41,64,28,242/- As Against Rs.3,50,15,393/- Surrendered/Offered By The Assessee. It Has Been Stated In The Grounds That The Addition Has Been Made By The Ao By Extrapolating The Figure Of Alleged On-Money Noted In Seized Documents Which Was Rough Detail Of Amount Received/ Receivable From The Buyers For The Booking

For Appellant: V.K. Jindal &For Respondent: Robin Chaudhary
Section 153

TDS made: b. Other miscellaneous expenses c. Construction related expenses Net Undisclosed Income (1-2) 41,64,28,242 Page 7 Tulsiani Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DC/ACIT CC Varanasi 6. The ld. CIT (A) has confirmed the said addition

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

5
Disallowance5
Section 133A4

M/S TIWARI CONSTRUCTIONS,SONEBHADRA vs. ITO, WARD -3(4), SONEBHADRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 82/VNS/2019[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Jun 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Tiwari Constructions Dibulganj, V. Income Tax Officer, Anpara, Sonebhadra, U.P. Ward-3(4), Sonebhadra Pan-Aafhj0966G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.06.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)

addition deserves to be deleted.” 3.1 A perusal of assessment order reveals that assessee has not disclosed TDS of Rs.3,263/- and has also shown interest income

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 02,, VARANASI

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

ITA 214/VNS/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi28 Dec 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.ArvindShukla, Adv. & Sh. AsimZafar, AdvFor Respondent: ShriA.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148

TDS of Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Varanasi Rs. 24,02,503/-, for ay: 2009-10. It was also submitted that the assessee e- filed income tax return in ITR-4, which is a return of income for declaring business income. The ld. Sr. DR submitted

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 2, VARANASI

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

ITA 213/VNS/2019[201-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi28 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh.ArvindShukla, Adv. & Sh. AsimZafar, AdvFor Respondent: ShriA.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148

TDS of Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Varanasi Rs. 24,02,503/-, for ay: 2009-10. It was also submitted that the assessee e- filed income tax return in ITR-4, which is a return of income for declaring business income. The ld. Sr. DR submitted

KAMAKHYA FRESH FOODS LTD.,GHAZIPUR vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE - 03, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesseein

ITA 113/VNS/2019[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi19 Apr 2022AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:1998-99 Kamakhya Fresh Foods The Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 45, Aamghat, Circle-3, Sahkari Colony, Varanasi, U.P. Ghazipur U.P. 233001 Pan: Aacck 2212P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriSubhash Chand And ShriAshutoshBhardwajFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 254Section 80I

additions to the income of the assessee, while also taking into account the declaration of the assessee in the computation of total income that “No deduction on account of 80IA have been claimed 7 Assessment Year: 1998-99 Kamakhya Fresh Foods Ltd. due to loss during the year”. The matter went up to tribunal , and the Allahabad-tribunal vide appellate

PRATAP DIAGNOSTIC CENTER,AZAMGARH vs. ITO (TDS),, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7/VNS/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)

Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, respectively. There is a delay in filing the two appeals by the assessee. The learned AR of the assessee has explained that initially the assessee has filed the appeal in ITA No. 43/VNS/2020 against the composite order of the CIT(A). However, subsequently when it was realized that

PRATAP DIAGNOSTIC CENTER,AZAMGARH vs. ITO (TDS), AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8/VNS/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Choubey, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)

Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, respectively. There is a delay in filing the two appeals by the assessee. The learned AR of the assessee has explained that initially the assessee has filed the appeal in ITA No. 43/VNS/2020 against the composite order of the CIT(A). However, subsequently when it was realized that

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA HUF,VARANASI vs. ACIT, CC, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 119/VNS/2019[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi23 Mar 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2014-15 Vinod Kumar Gupta (Huf), V. Acit, 20, Raghunath Nagar, Mahmoorganj, Central Circle, Varanasi Varanasi, U.P. Pan-Aabhv1586P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. O.P. Shukla, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. O.P. Shukla, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

TDS thereon. Due date for filing of return of income the said amount has not reflected in their 26Q and after expiry of one year the said amount were reflected in 26AS due to deductor has made provision after filing of return of income by the appellant. 2. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified

JAIVEER SINGH,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 1,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, appeal filed by theassesseeis allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 61/VNS/2019[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Varanasi22 Aug 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2014-15 Jaiveer Singh, Asstt. Commissioner Of Prop. Jvs Motors Income Tax, Range-1, V. H.No.514, Ramdhariniwas, Aayakarbhawan, Mohaddipur, Civil Lines, Gorakhpur-273001, U.P. Gorakhpur-273001,U.P. Pan:Avaps 3343R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriArun Kumar Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 40

addition being made by Assessing Officer to the income of the assesseeby disallowing advertisement expenses to tune of Rs.18,65,025/- as unverifiable advertisement expenses and also by invoking provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act for non deduction of income- tax at source under the provisions of the 1961 Act. 4. The assessee filed its return

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 264/ALLD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

TDS has also been attracted by the Principals awarding the work. The nature of activities of the appellant are akin to the activity of any other developer, builder or colonizer. 9. Thus, it is clear that income derived by the assessee from above sources are purely in the nature of commercial activities, the S.2(15) of IT Act clearly provides

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 267/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

TDS has also been attracted by the Principals awarding the work. The nature of activities of the appellant are akin to the activity of any other developer, builder or colonizer. 9. Thus, it is clear that income derived by the assessee from above sources are purely in the nature of commercial activities, the S.2(15) of IT Act clearly provides

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 266/ALLD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

TDS has also been attracted by the Principals awarding the work. The nature of activities of the appellant are akin to the activity of any other developer, builder or colonizer. 9. Thus, it is clear that income derived by the assessee from above sources are purely in the nature of commercial activities, the S.2(15) of IT Act clearly provides

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 265/ALLD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

TDS has also been attracted by the Principals awarding the work. The nature of activities of the appellant are akin to the activity of any other developer, builder or colonizer. 9. Thus, it is clear that income derived by the assessee from above sources are purely in the nature of commercial activities, the S.2(15) of IT Act clearly provides

ASHOK KUMAR SINGH,GHAZIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (5), GHAZIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 30/VNS/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi09 Nov 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 148Section 69

addition of Rs.32,00,505/- made by the AO as unexplained deposits u/s 69 of the Act. The assessee is also aggrieved in not giving TDS credit of Rs.94,211/-, being the income

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2,, GORAKHPUR vs. M/S SEORAHI COOPARETIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,, SEORAHI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

ITA 144/VNS/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi09 Jun 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Seorahi Cooperative Cane Income Tax, V. Development Union Ltd. Circle-2, Seorahi, Gorakhpur, U.P. Kushinagar, U.P. Pan:Aabas8968D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: None, written submissions filed by the assesseeFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 80P(2)(a)

TDS, and there is little effort to earn commission by the assessee. The AO 4 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, Circle-2, Gorakhpur v. M/s Seorahi Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd.,Seorahi, Kushinagar proposed to allow 1/3 of the gross commission receipts as total expenses incurred for earning commission income and proposed to bring to tax remaining commission receipts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 , GORAKHPUR vs. THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LIMITED, GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 217/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

addition relating to unverified consignment sales expenses. 18 The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd A.Ys 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2020-21 17.1 The AO noticed that the assessee has claimed expenses relating to consignment sales to the tune of Rs.72,08,335/-. Since the assessee did not furnish bills/vouchers and also the details of TDS deducted, the AO disallowed

THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LTD.,GORAKHPUR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 13/VNS/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

addition relating to unverified consignment sales expenses. 18 The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd A.Ys 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2020-21 17.1 The AO noticed that the assessee has claimed expenses relating to consignment sales to the tune of Rs.72,08,335/-. Since the assessee did not furnish bills/vouchers and also the details of TDS deducted, the AO disallowed

DCIT,, GORAKHPUR vs. M/S MAHABIR JITE MILLS, LTD., GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 448/ALLD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

addition relating to unverified consignment sales expenses. 18 The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd A.Ys 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2020-21 17.1 The AO noticed that the assessee has claimed expenses relating to consignment sales to the tune of Rs.72,08,335/-. Since the assessee did not furnish bills/vouchers and also the details of TDS deducted, the AO disallowed

THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LIMITED,GORAKHPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 , GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

ITA 351/ALLD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 4Section 40A(3)

addition relating to unverified consignment sales expenses. 18 The Mahabir Jute Mills Ltd A.Ys 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2020-21 17.1 The AO noticed that the assessee has claimed expenses relating to consignment sales to the tune of Rs.72,08,335/-. Since the assessee did not furnish bills/vouchers and also the details of TDS deducted, the AO disallowed

PRABHAKAR UPADHYAY,AZAMGARH vs. ITO, WARD - 02, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 184/VNS/2019[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi22 Mar 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2010-11 Prabhakar Upadhyay, V. Income Tax Officer Village-Bijarwa P.O.- Bankat Teh- Ward-2, Azamgarh, U.P. Sagri Distt-Azamgarh, U.P. Pan-Aaupu7174P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2022

For Appellant: Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 80CSection 80D

additions one is on account of undisclosed turnover / receipts found deposited in the bank account and another is regarding disallowance of certain expenses for want of vouchers. The assessee has filed his return of income on 25.09.2010 declaring total income of Rs. 2,80,620/- and agricultural income of Rs. 50,000/-. The return was processed and a credit