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.

28 results for “TDS”+ Section 5clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,964Delhi5,876Bangalore2,776Chennai2,464Kolkata1,762Pune1,559Ahmedabad1,249Hyderabad1,053Cochin814Indore756Jaipur719Patna559Chandigarh554Raipur494Karnataka417Nagpur415Visakhapatnam381Cuttack346Surat342Rajkot269Lucknow211Amritsar182Jabalpur150Jodhpur130Dehradun125Ranchi124Agra89Guwahati81Panaji81Telangana70Allahabad67Varanasi28SC26Calcutta21Kerala17Rajasthan9Himachal Pradesh8Punjab & Haryana7J&K5Orissa4Uttarakhand3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Gauhati1Bombay1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)28Section 143(3)24Section 20117TDS14Section 80I13Section 2(15)12Section 14810Section 271C9Section 272A(2)(k)9Addition to 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

5. Aggrieved by dismissal of the appeal filed by ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed second appeal with the tribunal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assesseeis a housewife. Our attention was drawn by ld. Counsel for the assessee to Affidavit dated 23.08.2018 filed by the assessee before ld. CIT(A) , which is at page

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

9
Deduction9
Penalty6

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

5. Aggrieved by dismissal of the appeal filed by ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed second appeal with the tribunal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assesseeis a housewife. Our attention was drawn by ld. Counsel for the assessee to Affidavit dated 23.08.2018 filed by the assessee before ld. CIT(A) , which is at page

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (1),, VARANASI vs. PROMINENT DATAMATICS MARKETING PVT. LTD., , VARANASI

ITA 135/VNS/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 124(1)(a)Section 124(2)Section 124(3)(a)Section 250(1)Section 255(4)Section 69A

TDS Payable 73,500 5,76,674 8 Provision for 6,99,738 30,447 Taxation Total 30,19,86,328 21,97,16,115 I.T.A. No.135/VNS/2020 27 C.IO.No.04/VNS/2021 Assessment Year:2017-18 However, copy of summary of current liabilities for the financial year 2016-17 relevant assessment year 2017-18 along with respective grounds marked as Annexure

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)

sections. The learned AR has submitted that the assessee has deposited the challan as required by the statute and also filed the return of TDS but the TDS return has not been considered by the AO while passing the impugned order. Thus the learned AR has pleaded that the matter may be set aside to the record

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)

sections. The learned AR has submitted that the assessee has deposited the challan as required by the statute and also filed the return of TDS but the TDS return has not been considered by the AO while passing the impugned order. Thus the learned AR has pleaded that the matter may be set aside to the record

MANISH JAISWAL,GORAKHPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, (TDS), ALLAHABAD

ITA 216/VNS/2019[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi31 May 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17 Mr. Manish Jaiswal, Addl.Cit (Tds), Prop. New Manish Medical V. Allahabad-211001, U.P. Agencies Pashupati Market, Gandhi Park, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan: Akdpj7675D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 194ISection 271CSection 273BSection 274

TDS) ON TRANSFER OF CERTAIN IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES (OTHER THAN AGRICULTURAL LAND) There is a statutory requirement under section 139Aof the Income-tax Act read with rule 114B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 to quote Permanent Account Number (PAN) in documents pertaining to purchase or sale of immovable property for value of Rs. 5

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5/VNS/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Oct 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 201Section 201(1)

5. The ld. CIT(A) has held that the Assessing Officer was correct in calculating the interest as per the provisions of section 201(1A) of the I.T. Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. It is an undisputed fact that the deductee has fulfilled the tax liability of payment made

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, ,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6/VNS/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 201Section 201(1)

5. The ld. CIT(A) has held that the Assessing Officer was correct in calculating the interest as per the provisions of section 201(1A) of the I.T. Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. It is an undisputed fact that the deductee has fulfilled the tax liability of payment made

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7/VNS/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Oct 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 201Section 201(1)

5. The ld. CIT(A) has held that the Assessing Officer was correct in calculating the interest as per the provisions of section 201(1A) of the I.T. Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. It is an undisputed fact that the deductee has fulfilled the tax liability of payment made

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

Section 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of income-tax at source by the assessee. 5. The assessee being aggrieved by addition so made by AO as above, filed first appeal before ld. CIT(A) , who dismissed the appeal of the assessee, by holding as under: “7. Ground of appeal no. 4 During the course of assessment proceedingthe AO noted

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

TDS of Rs. 1,38,024/- was allowed to the assessee in the proceedings under section 154. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny. The assessee is a civil contractor and shown the net profit @ 6.96% on the gross receipts of 52,29,132/-. During the scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that as per the bank account statement

RAMESH CHANDRA JAISWAL,GORAKHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (5), GORAKHPUR

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

ITA 31/VNS/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Dec 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)Section 56

section 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 50000 Provided that monetary gift received by an individual or HUF from relatives will not be charged to tax and spouse falls under the definition of relatives as per the Income Tax Act. 5. Interest on FDR made as on 01-08-2008 in the name of my wife Maya Jaiswal. TDS

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)

5. Nowhere in the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 words like charity or charitable, poor, economically weaker, subsidy/subsidized, assistance, uplift are mentioned. It is evident from the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. that

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)

5. Nowhere in the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 words like charity or charitable, poor, economically weaker, subsidy/subsidized, assistance, uplift are mentioned. It is evident from the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. that

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)

5. Nowhere in the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 words like charity or charitable, poor, economically weaker, subsidy/subsidized, assistance, uplift are mentioned. It is evident from the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. that

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)

5. Nowhere in the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 words like charity or charitable, poor, economically weaker, subsidy/subsidized, assistance, uplift are mentioned. It is evident from the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. that

SACHIT HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,GORAKHPUR vs. JCIT, TDS, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 62/VNS/2019[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi27 May 2022AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS), Allahabad Range, Lines, Gorakhpur, U.P. Allahabad PAN-AAHCS3945G TAN-ALDS02773D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against the four separate orders of the CIT(A) all dated 25.10.2018 arising from

SACHIT HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,,GORAKHPUR vs. JCIT, TDS, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 94/VNS/2019[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS), Allahabad Range, Lines, Gorakhpur, U.P. Allahabad PAN-AAHCS3945G TAN-ALDS02773D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against the four separate orders of the CIT(A) all dated 25.10.2018 arising from

SACHIT HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,GORAKHPUR vs. JCIT, TDS, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 95/VNS/2019[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS), Allahabad Range, Lines, Gorakhpur, U.P. Allahabad PAN-AAHCS3945G TAN-ALDS02773D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against the four separate orders of the CIT(A) all dated 25.10.2018 arising from

SACHIT HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,GORAKHPUR vs. JCIT, TDS, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 63/VNS/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

TDS), Allahabad Range, Lines, Gorakhpur, U.P. Allahabad PAN-AAHCS3945G TAN-ALDS02773D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26.05.2022 Date of pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against the four separate orders of the CIT(A) all dated 25.10.2018 arising from