THE CHIEF MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION)STATE BANK OF INDIA,)N,JHANSI vs. ADDITIONAL CIT (TDS), KANPUR

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 287/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 289/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Chief Manager (Administration) Addl. Cit (Tds) State Bank Of India Kanpur बनाम/ Regional Business Office (Rbo), Vs. 372/44, Gwalior Road Civil Lines, Jhansi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir/Tan No.Agrs-14799-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Deepak Maheshwari, Adv.-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015-16 & 2017-18 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Identical I.E., Confirmation Of Levy Of Penalty U/S 271C. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2015-16 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-06-2024 Confirming Levy Of Penalty U/S 271C.

exempt u/s 10(5) which do not require any TDS. No TDS was deducted under bona fide impression that if the destination

SURESH CHAND AGRAWAL HUF,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3)(1), MATHURA, MATHURA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshsuresh Chand Agarwal Huf, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mp Agarwal Street, Mansani, Ward-1(3)(1), Mathura, Up Mathura (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabhs6117F Assessee By : Shri M. M. Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026

TDS of Rs 9,32,000/-. It is not in Suresh Chand Agarwal HUF dispute that the proceeds received on compulsory acquisition of the property is exempt

THE REGIONAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA ,FARRUKHABAD vs. ITO (TDS) , ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

exempted as\n'income' and hence under normal circumstances, there should be no\nquestion of TDS on this payment. All the same

AL HAMD AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD,ALIGARH vs. DC/ACIT, ALIGARH

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

TDS. He brought to our notice 2 | P a g e two parties, to whom the assessee has paid oasis agency commission, B & G Export Corporation PTY Ltd. and Red Coral Business Consultants. He submitted that Oasis are exempt

OMKAR MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,GWALIOR vs. CIT[EXEMPTION], BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Omkar Memorial Vs. Cit(E), Charitable Society, Bhopal Room No. 201, Ii Floor, Reac, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaa08054B Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2025

Exemptions) (hereinafter referred as “ld CIT(E) in short) was justified in rejecting the application for grant of registration u/s 12AB of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee is a charitable society and was granted provisional registration. The assessee

SUNITA,SAHU vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshashok Sahu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Purana Bazar, Chirgaon, Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgsps3446H Sunita, Vs. Assessment Unit, Ward No. 2, Chobyana Income Tax Talrehat Lake View Department, Camp, Lalitpur, Lalitpur, National Faceless Up Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgps3438H

Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent jurisdiction

NARAYANI RATHORE,SHIVPURI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshnarayani Rathore, Vs. Assessment Unit, Peeroth Shivpuri, Income Tax Shivpuri, Mp Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dhgpr1886H

Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent jurisdiction

ASHOK SAHU,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(1), JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshashok Sahu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Purana Bazar, Chirgaon, Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgsps3446H Sunita, Vs. Assessment Unit, Ward No. 2, Chobyana Income Tax Talrehat Lake View Department, Camp, Lalitpur, Lalitpur, National Faceless Up Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgps3438H

Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent jurisdiction

HARICHARAN RATHORE,ASHOK NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,ASHOK NAGAR, ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshharicharan Rathore, Vs. Ito, 125, Path Kheda, Ashok Ashok Nagar, Nagar, Mp Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Csqpr0999M Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Haricharan Rathore Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent

BADARIPRASAD,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GUNA, GUNA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshbadriprasad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Heerabagh Colony, Guna, Guna, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Arapr6314B

Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 Badriprasad 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent jurisdiction