ITO (TDS), HISAR vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, BHIWANI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, following its previous order for similar assessment years, remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to decide the issue afresh in light of the Tribunal's previous directions.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer treated the assessee (Union Bank of India) in default for failure to deduct TDS on interest under Section 194A for assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeals, and the Revenue is aggrieved by the relief granted.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee failed to deduct tax at source on interest payments, and if so, the consequences thereof.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : “C” : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI
ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal filed by the Revenue arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A) on 30.01.2015 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Assessing Officer passed order u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) treating the assessee in default for assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14 in respect of failure of the assessee to deduct tax at 194A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), vide his common order for all the five years, partly allowed the appeals. The Revenue, in the instant appeal, is aggrieved against the relief allowed by the ld. CIT(A).
After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is observed that the other four years, for which common order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A), came up for consideration before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 22.12.2007, the Tribunal, in relation to assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14, has remanded the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer in the light of certain directions. A copy of such order is available on record. Since the facts and circumstances of the instant appeal are mutatis mutandis similar to those of succeeding years disposed of by the Tribunal, respectfully following the precedent, we remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh assailed in this appeal, in the light of the directions given by the Tribunal in the aforesaid order.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order pronounced in the open court on 31st May, 2018.
More judgments on Section 194A
- S R P Jutha 13 Rajkot VI and Gr S Ma, Rajkot vs ITO WD 1(2)(1) Rajkot, RajkotITA 951/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Welspun Aunta Simaria Project Private… vs DCIT, Circle-78(1), DelhiITA 6559/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Lakhmanbhai Maru, Vadodara vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Vadodara, Aayakar…ITA 1046/AHD/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
- Hexad Infosoft Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITA 1713/BANG/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Hexad Infosoft Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITA 1712/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026