State Bank of Travancore v. CIT

370 ITR 379High Court2015#20651 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2023.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing State Bank of Travancore v. CIT

M/S the State Bank of Patiala, Patiala vs. ACIT, Patiala

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 510/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 The State Bank Of India Asst. Cit Circle-Patiala, (Successor To State Bank Of Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Patiala), Patiala-147001 Dgm & Cfo, Sbi, Local Head Office – Chandigarh, 2Nd Floor, Sector 17A, Chandigarh- 160017. Pan No. Aaccs 0143 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved & Mr. Ninadpatade, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/03/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 The State Bank of India Asst. CIT Circle-Patiala, (Successor to State Bank of Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Patiala), Patiala-147001 DGM & CFO, SBI, Local Head Office – Chandigarh, 2nd floor, Sector 17A, Chandigarh- 160017. PAN No. AACCS 0143 D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ketan Ved & Mr. NinadPatade, ARs Revenue by : Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR : Date of Hearing 09/03/2023 Date of pronouncem…

DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3033/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit-2(2)(1), Vs. M/S State Bank Of India Mumbai (Successor To State Room No. 545, Bank Of Bikaner & 5Th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) DCIT-2(2)(1), Vs. M/s State Bank of India Mumbai (Successor to State Room no. 545, Bank of Bikaner & 5th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s State Bank of India Vs. DCIT-2(2)(1), (Successor to State Bank Mumbai of Bikaner & Jaipur) Room no. 545, Finan…

State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur), Mumbai vs. ACIT -Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2873/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit-2(2)(1), Vs. M/S State Bank Of India Mumbai (Successor To State Room No. 545, Bank Of Bikaner & 5Th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) DCIT-2(2)(1), Vs. M/s State Bank of India Mumbai (Successor to State Room no. 545, Bank of Bikaner & 5th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s State Bank of India Vs. DCIT-2(2)(1), (Successor to State Bank Mumbai of Bikaner & Jaipur) Room no. 545, Finan…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…e taxed since interest was not payable on the 31st March as per the terms of the said securities. 113. The learned CIT DR referred to several decisions such as State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC), U.P Chalchitra Nigam Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 370 ITR 379 (Allahabad) and Mahindra Telecommunication Investment P. Ltd Vs. ITO [2016] 69 taxmann.com 431 (Mumbai). He argued that the 107 | P a g e State Bank of India ITA Nos.3644&4563/Mum/2016 facts are not applicable to the present issue as in the said cases there was no dispute that as per the terms of contract between the parties, income had accrued b…