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 as per Notification SO 3489 dt.\r\n22/10/1970 under section 194A(3) (iii) (F) which includes “ any undertaking\r\nor body

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 as per Notification SO 3489 dt.\n22/10/1970 under section 194A(3) (iii) (F) which includes “ any undertaking\nor body

ITO, W-6(1), MOHALI vs. SH. NIRANKAR SINGH, MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15

f) of sub clause (iii), sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act. The provisions of sub section (3) requiring an 2 ITA No.433-c-2018- Shri Nirankar Singh, Mohali assessee to deduct TDS

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SUKHAM INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD., CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13

f) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notify the following for the purposes of the said sub- clause:— (i) any corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act; (ii) any company in which all the shares are held (whether singly or taken

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SUKHAM INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD., CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13

f) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notify the following for the purposes of the said sub- clause:— (i) any corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act; (ii) any company in which all the shares are held (whether singly or taken

ITO (TDS-1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SUKHM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13

f) of clause (iii) of sub- section (3) of section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notify the following for the purposes of the said sub- clause:— (i) any corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act; (ii) any company in which all the shares are held (whether singly or taken

MADAN LAL,MANDI DABWALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SIRSA

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

3 that this issue has been arising continuously not only before this Bench but across other Benches. Recently I have taken note of one order passed in the case of Shri Madan Lal Gupta ITA No.192/JP/2024 wherein the Tribunal has made a detailed discussion and I have taken note of this discussion which reads as under : “6. We have heard

MADAN LAL,MANDI DABWALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SIRSA

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

3 that this issue has been arising continuously not only before this Bench but across other Benches. Recently I have taken note of one order passed in the case of Shri Madan Lal Gupta ITA No.192/JP/2024 wherein the Tribunal has made a detailed discussion and I have taken note of this discussion which reads as under : “6. We have heard

THE MANAGER, ALLAHABAD BANK,SHIMLA vs. ITO, TDS, SHIMLA

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

TDS in accordance with the provisions of Section 194A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the interest paid to various consumers on the term deposits etc. and created the demand of Rs. 6,18,218/- for the year under consideration. 6. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the demand raised

MUNISH KUMAR LEGAL HEIR LATE SH GURDEEP SINGH,VILL MANAKPUR, YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 5, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

KARTAR SINGH, FATEHABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

PARVEEN KUMAR,229,VILLAGE MANAKPUR-II,TEHSIL JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT PANCHKULA, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

BIMLA DEVI,JAGADHRI vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

ASHOK KUMAR THAKRAL,JAGADHRI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA , PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

MADHU GREWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

SH. DEVENDER KUMAR,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD -1, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

ANIL TUTEJA,FATEHABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

KARAN PRATAP SINGH,SIRSA, HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-1, SIRSA, HARYANA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last

MANINDER JEET SINGH V.P.O. UDHAMGARH,JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

3) or even when the PCIT passed order u/s 263 and so, when the issue is purely legal and it is highly debatable, proceedings u/s 263 is not possible:  The issue of taxability of receipt of interest u/s 28 of LA Act on enhanced compensation of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is not a recent issue. In the last