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.

12 results for “TDS”+ Section 292clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai335Delhi333Bangalore269Chennai97Karnataka94Kolkata71Chandigarh64Hyderabad53Ahmedabad37Jaipur32Indore32Cuttack25Pune21Raipur15Nagpur13Visakhapatnam12Guwahati8Lucknow5Surat5Amritsar4Cochin4Rajkot3Patna3Allahabad2Panaji2Ranchi2SC1Telangana1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 14821Section 133A17Section 36(1)(v)14Section 40A(7)(b)14Survey u/s 133A10Section 206C9Section 1477Section 143(1)7Deduction7Reopening of Assessment

VISWATEJA SPINNING MILLS PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 577/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years:2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vs. Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., Income Tax Officer (Tds) -Ward – 1 Boyapalem Village Income Tax Office Boyapalem To Phirangipuram Road Cr Buildings, Kannavari Thota Venkayalapadu Post Guntur – 522001 Edlapadu Mandalam Andhra Pradesh Guntur District – 522233 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv8759M] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 133ASection 206CSection 206C(6)

TDS Survey Operation under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted in the office premises of the assessee on 03.02.2020 to verify the assessee’s compliance to the TDS/TCS provisions as per Chapter XVIIB of the Act. Consequent to the survey, the assessee furnished Page. No 2 I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/VIZ/2025 Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., the information

7
Section 206C(6)3
TDS3

VISWATEJA SPINNING MILLS PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 575/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years:2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vs. Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., Income Tax Officer (Tds) -Ward – 1 Boyapalem Village Income Tax Office Boyapalem To Phirangipuram Road Cr Buildings, Kannavari Thota Venkayalapadu Post Guntur – 522001 Edlapadu Mandalam Andhra Pradesh Guntur District – 522233 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv8759M] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 133ASection 206CSection 206C(6)

TDS Survey Operation under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted in the office premises of the assessee on 03.02.2020 to verify the assessee’s compliance to the TDS/TCS provisions as per Chapter XVIIB of the Act. Consequent to the survey, the assessee furnished Page. No 2 I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/VIZ/2025 Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., the information

VISWATEJA SPINNING MILLS PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD-1, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 578/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years:2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Vs. Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., Income Tax Officer (Tds) -Ward – 1 Boyapalem Village Income Tax Office Boyapalem To Phirangipuram Road Cr Buildings, Kannavari Thota Venkayalapadu Post Guntur – 522001 Edlapadu Mandalam Andhra Pradesh Guntur District – 522233 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aabcv8759M] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 133ASection 206CSection 206C(6)

TDS Survey Operation under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted in the office premises of the assessee on 03.02.2020 to verify the assessee’s compliance to the TDS/TCS provisions as per Chapter XVIIB of the Act. Consequent to the survey, the assessee furnished Page. No 2 I.T.A.Nos.575, 576, 577 & 578/VIZ/2025 Viswateja Spinning Mills (P.) Ltd., the information

GRANDHI SRI VENKATA AMARENDRA,ELURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14

ITA 23/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.23 & 24/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of C/O Vaibhav Jewllers Income Tax, Main Road Central Circle-1 Eluru Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Income Tax, Amarendra Central Circle-1 C/O Vaibhav Jewellers Visakhapatnam Main Road Eluru [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21 .08.2018

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 68

section 2(23) of Indian Stamp Act, 1999, but no such acknowledgement was obtained by the assessee. Most of the vouchers were not verified by the responsible person such as accountant, manager etc. and the addresses of the goldsmiths were not furnished. The AO was of the view that the assessee was unable to prove the expenditure with the credible

GRANDHI SRI VENKATA AMARENDRA,ELURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14

ITA 24/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.23 & 24/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Amarendra Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of C/O Vaibhav Jewllers Income Tax, Main Road Central Circle-1 Eluru Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Grandhi Sri Venkata Income Tax, Amarendra Central Circle-1 C/O Vaibhav Jewellers Visakhapatnam Main Road Eluru [Pan : Abipa7175R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21 .08.2018

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 68

section 2(23) of Indian Stamp Act, 1999, but no such acknowledgement was obtained by the assessee. Most of the vouchers were not verified by the responsible person such as accountant, manager etc. and the addresses of the goldsmiths were not furnished. The AO was of the view that the assessee was unable to prove the expenditure with the credible

THE ACIT., CIRCLE - 1, ELURU, ELURU vs. M/S THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.,, ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 476/VIZ/2012[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

M/S THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.,ELURU vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, ELURU, ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 49/VIZ/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

THE ACIT,, ELURU vs. M/S. THE DISTRICT CO - OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 269/VIZ/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

M/S THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.,ELURU vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, ELURU, ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 50/VIZ/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

THE ITO, WARD-2, ELURU, ELURU vs. M/S THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 78/VIZ/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.,,ELURU vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 515/VIZ/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court

THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD.,,ELURU vs. THE ACIT,, ELURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 524/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court