Punjab State Electricity Board v. ITO (Chandigarh Bench

88 TTJ 450Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#21547 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 361,891 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Punjab State Electricity Board v. ITO (Chandigarh Bench

The Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Shimla vs. Addl. CIT, Range, Shimla

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

ITA 906/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

…espondent in each case has discharged its burden of showing reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source.// 5.2. Further, reference was drawn to the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. ITO (Chandigarh Bench – 88 TTJ 450) where at para 23, it was held as under:- “23. The learned CIT(A) while cancelling penalty under s. 271C has held that the assessee bona fidely believed that it was not liable to deduct surcharge from the interest paid on Bonds. It has further been held that the assessee could have derived no benefit by not deducting surcharge at source as the am…

The Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Shimla vs. Addl. CIT, Range, Shimla

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

ITA 905/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

…espondent in each case has discharged its burden of showing reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source.// 5.2. Further, reference was drawn to the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. ITO (Chandigarh Bench – 88 TTJ 450) where at para 23, it was held as under:- “23. The learned CIT(A) while cancelling penalty under s. 271C has held that the assessee bona fidely believed that it was not liable to deduct surcharge from the interest paid on Bonds. It has further been held that the assessee could have derived no benefit by not deducting surcharge at source as the am…

The Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Nahan vs. Addl. CIT, Range, Shimla

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

ITA 904/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

…espondent in each case has discharged its burden of showing reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source.// 5.2. Further, reference was drawn to the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. ITO (Chandigarh Bench – 88 TTJ 450) where at para 23, it was held as under:- “23. The learned CIT(A) while cancelling penalty under s. 271C has held that the assessee bona fidely believed that it was not liable to deduct surcharge from the interest paid on Bonds. It has further been held that the assessee could have derived no benefit by not deducting surcharge at source as the am…

The Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Nahan vs. Addl. CIT, Range, Shimla

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

ITA 903/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

…espondent in each case has discharged its burden of showing reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source.// 5.2. Further, reference was drawn to the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. ITO (Chandigarh Bench – 88 TTJ 450) where at para 23, it was held as under:- “23. The learned CIT(A) while cancelling penalty under s. 271C has held that the assessee bona fidely believed that it was not liable to deduct surcharge from the interest paid on Bonds. It has further been held that the assessee could have derived no benefit by not deducting surcharge at source as the am…

Punjab State Electricity Board v. ITO (Chandigarh Bench (88 TTJ 450) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax