THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assesseee Is Aggrieved By The Common Order Bearing Number Itba/Apl/M/250/2019- 20/1021304437(1) Dt. 25/11/2019 Of Cit(A) Shimla, H.P. Passed U/S 250 Of The Act Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The “Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-17 & The Corresponding Previous Year Period Is From 01/04/2015 To 31/03/2016. 2. At The Outset The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Above Appeals Are Barred By Limitation By 02 Days.

TDS exempted payment u/s 194A(3)(v). That this exemption is still intact even after the amendment made by the Finance

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\nallowed

TDS exempted payment u/s\n194A(3)(v). That this exemption is still intact even after the amendment\nmade by the Finance

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\r\nallowed

TDS exempted payment u/s\r\n194A(3)(v). That this exemption is still intact even after the amendment\r\nmade

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. UNIPRO TECHNO INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the order of the ld CIT(A) is confirmed and the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

exempt u/s 80IA and TDS was deducted on the total receipt of the company, the excess amount of TDS deducted

STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-1),, CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT/ACIT-TDS, CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,AMRITSAR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INDIA (IN-SITU), LUDHIANA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE(15875),PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-I), CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA, SAMB BRANCH,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-1), CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT-TDS, CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (TDS-I), CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (TDS-I), CHANDIGARH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS on LTC/LFC reimbursements to employees where journeys included foreign legs, claiming exemption under Section 10(5) of the Act. The AO issued

M/S STATE BANK OF PATIALA,PATIALA vs. ITO, (TDS), PATIALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1/Chd/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 State Bank Of India, Vs. The Ito (Tds), बनाम Patiala (Earlier Known As State Bank Of Patiala),Treasury Branch, Chotti Baradari, Patiala "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacs8571K ""यथ"/Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Vibhore Garg, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Dharam Vir, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.04.2023 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2023 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

TDS on payment of interest to an organization whose income is exempted u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,NEW SHIMLA vs. DCIT(TDS), PANCHKULA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.397/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Punjab National Dcit (Tds) Bankbramta Bhawan, Sector 2, बनाम/ Vs. Sector 1 Himachal Pradesh- Haryana. 171009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Tan/Gir No. Ptlpl-2970-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rakesh Kumar (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Pune [Cit(A)] Dated 15-02-2024 Confirming Certain Demand Raised By Ld. Ao Against The Assessee-Bank U/S 201(1) / 201(1A) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 09-10-2018. 2. Upon Perusal Of Order Of Ld. Ao, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee Paid Interest To Certain State Government Entities Viz. Hp

exempt any corporation established by Central, State or provincial Act from the rigors of TDS u/s 194A. Once such a notificationexists

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS of Rs.3,46,561/- was deducted by the Land Acquisition Officer u/s 194A. 6. It was further stated that in the original return the assessee had inadvertently offered the said interest amount to tax, however, upon realising that the interest received was interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquis`ition Act, 1894, being part of compensation and exempt

PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS of Rs.3,46,561/- was deducted by the Land Acquisition Officer u/s 194A. 6. It was further stated that in the original return the assessee had inadvertently offered the said interest amount to tax, however, upon realising that the interest received was interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquis`ition Act, 1894, being part of compensation and exempt

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

TDS of Rs.3,46,561/- was deducted by the Land Acquisition Officer u/s 194A. 6. It was further stated that in the original return the assessee had inadvertently offered the said interest amount to tax, however, upon realising that the interest received was interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquis`ition Act, 1894, being part of compensation and exempt

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS of Rs.3,46,561/- was deducted by the Land Acquisition Officer u/s 194A. 6. It was further stated that in the original return the assessee had inadvertently offered the said interest amount to tax, however, upon realising that the interest received was interest u/s 28 of the Land Acquis`ition Act, 1894, being part of compensation and exempt