ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX , CIRCLE -1,, JAMMU vs. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD.,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU, SRINAGAR vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, no tax was required to be deducted on interest on deposit paid to a corporation, incorporated under State Act. It has been argued before me that the issue is squarely covered by the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar bench passed against the orders of ITO, TDS, Jammu in respect

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Sh. T. S. Kapoor & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 298/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pan: Aaact6167G Dy. C. I. T., Vs. M/S. The Jammu & Kashmir Circle-1, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bank Ltd., Corporate Head Bhawan, Railhead Complex, Quarters, M. A. Road, Jammu. Srinagar. (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Act and as per notification, the Jammu Development Authority is a creation of J & K Development Act and satisfies the condition at Entry No.39 of the said notification and we hold that no tax was deductible on accrued interest on FDRs of Jammu Development Authority with J & K Bank Ltd. Keeping in view

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -IV, KAPURTHALA vs. M/S PUNJAB GRAMIN BANK, KAPURTHALA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Ravish Sood

section 36(1)(viia) only provision for bad and doubtful debts was allowable as deduction. 6. That while allowing the relief of Rs. 3,53,47,000/-, Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that it was a contingent liability and was not allowable as business expenditure. The P a g e | 3 ITA No. 784 & 731/Asr./2017