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.

143 results for “TDS”+ Section 6(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,071Delhi2,997Bangalore1,372Chennai988Kolkata778Ahmedabad563Pune529Cochin438Hyderabad414Chandigarh349Jaipur341Raipur269Indore257Karnataka249Visakhapatnam143Surat126Cuttack120Rajkot103Nagpur102Lucknow89Jodhpur55Guwahati48Amritsar48Dehradun46Ranchi45Jabalpur41Patna38Telangana36Agra34Panaji34Allahabad19SC18Varanasi12Kerala12Calcutta8Himachal Pradesh7Rajasthan5Uttarakhand3Orissa3J&K2Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)79Addition to Income47Section 14844TDS41Section 80I36Section 153A34Disallowance26Section 142(1)25Section 143(2)23Deduction

SRI SAI DURGA HOUSING ESTATES,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRALISED PROCESSING CELL-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Appala Raju, DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

6-2015 under section 200A levying section 234E late fees is not valid.However, the High Court kept open the issue on constitutional validity of section 234E . The decision of Bombay High Court in Rashmikant Kundalia's case (supra) has already been referred in this regard, wherein the constitutional validity of section 234E has been upheld.[Para 32] • Accordingly, the amendment

SRI SAI DURGA HOUSING ESTATES,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRALISED PROCESSING CELL-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

Showing 1–20 of 143 · Page 1 of 8

...
23
Section 14720
Section 133A20

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Appala Raju, DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

6-2015 under section 200A levying section 234E late fees is not valid.However, the High Court kept open the issue on constitutional validity of section 234E . The decision of Bombay High Court in Rashmikant Kundalia's case (supra) has already been referred in this regard, wherein the constitutional validity of section 234E has been upheld.[Para 32] • Accordingly, the amendment

ANDHRA PRADESH HOUSING BOARD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 732/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

TDS”), if any, appearing against the PAN of the assessee-company be allowed to it. Accordingly, the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 6. The assessee aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 7. Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CA, Learned Authorized Representative (for short “Ld.AR

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 386/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 387/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

GATTULA LAKSHMI MADHAVI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 385/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.385, 386 & 387/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Pan: Agfpg8929H Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 15/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam-3, Dated 21/03/2025, 24/03/2025 & 16/04/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 Of The Income Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Acit Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, "The Act”), Dated 27/03/2023; Under Section 271Aac(1) Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023; & Under Section 270A Of The Act, Dated 21/08/2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. As The Facts Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interwoven, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69

TDS credit of Rs. 5,000/-). Against the aforesaid tax liability, the assessee had paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 84,676/- on 07/03/2020 and arrived at the balance tax liability of Rs. 2,89,080/-. Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi vs. ACIT 5. Thereafter, the assessee, in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2022, had filed

VENKATA RAMANA GODA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 489/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Ramana Goda, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Pan: Abzpg3216A Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 17/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 08/03/2025. The 2 Venkata Ramana Goda Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

TDS credited under his PAN - as his income, in order to put a quietus, which amounts otherwise are not assessee's income. 6. The Learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting assessee's contention that Ld.AO ought to have exercised his powers u/s 133(6) of the IT Act to obtain a clarity from LIC regarding the nature and details

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DODDI ROOPA, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 413/VIZ/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.413/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa, Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Atfpr7237N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

TDS) on the payments made to M/s. A.K. Capital Enterprises, as against the purchases made during the year under consideration. Accordingly, the AO, based on his conviction that 4 DCIT vs. Smt. Doddi Roopa the assessee has failed to justify the purchases of Rs. 4,99,65,247/-, passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 29/03/2023

RANAR AGROCHEM LIMITED,PARAWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 288/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.288/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Ranar Agrochem Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaccp0372M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M. Madhusudan, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Jenardhanan V, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 31/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15/05/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 30/12/2016 For A.Y.

For Appellant: Shri M. Madhusudan, CAFor Respondent: Sri Jenardhanan V, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 68

iii) addition of the unreconciled interest income as reflected in Form No. 26AS vis-à-vis books of account of Rs. 1,35,680/-; and (iv) addition of the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act: Rs. 3,47,97,000/-. 4 Ranar Agrochem Limited vs. DCIT 4. Aggrieved, the assessee company carried the matter

M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY CO. LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-2, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, I.T.A. No. 359/VIZ/2019 filed by the Revenue

ITA 553/VIZ/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 194(3)(iii)Section 194ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)

section 194A(3)(iii)(b) as any interest paid to any financial corporation established by or under a Central, State or Provincial Act is exempt from TDS. Accordingly, no TDS is leviable on the payment made to APIIC. The ld. Commissioner further held that since the income of the payee i.e. APIIC is exempt u/sec

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-2,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY COMPANY. LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, I.T.A. No. 359/VIZ/2019 filed by the Revenue

ITA 359/VIZ/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 194(3)(iii)Section 194ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)

section 194A(3)(iii)(b) as any interest paid to any financial corporation established by or under a Central, State or Provincial Act is exempt from TDS. Accordingly, no TDS is leviable on the payment made to APIIC. The ld. Commissioner further held that since the income of the payee i.e. APIIC is exempt u/sec

TEKI VENKATA RAMA RAO,,KAKINADA vs. THE ITO,, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 151/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Aug 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.151/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Sri Teki Venkata Ramana Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.11-2-10 (International Taxation) Seshasai Street Kakinada Ramarao Peta Kakinada, E.G.Dist [Pan :Affpt6413G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri I.Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri V.Appala Raju, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2018 10.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Appala Raju, DR
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(2)

TDS) 209 Taxmann 0092. 7. On the other hand, the Ld.DR supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In this case, the assessee made the payments to the non residents 6 Sri Teki Venkata Ramana Rao, Kakinada but not deducted the tax at source as required

GVK POWER & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,KADIYAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 553/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Gvk Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.5-48, Gvk Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, Kadiyammandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [Pan :Aaacj5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant By Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 5

section 36(1)(iii) the following conditions are required to be satisfied before the assessee can successfully claim deduction in respect of interest paid : (a) The assessee should have borrowed capital; (b) The borrowing of the capital should be for the purpose of the business and (c) Interest should have been paid on the borrowing. The finding of the Tribunal

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue

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)

TDS and assessee failed to deduct the tax at source. Therefore, we do not have any hesitation to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. 22. Ground Nos.5 & 6 are related to the addition of ` 12,52,25,946/- relating overdue interest on Non performing assets. This issue