BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

44 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 125clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai159Mumbai133Karnataka122Bangalore120Kolkata92Ahmedabad86Delhi85Jaipur51Chandigarh44Hyderabad41Calcutta40Pune38Indore28Rajkot23Surat18Lucknow13Cuttack13Ranchi10Amritsar7Jodhpur7Telangana6Panaji6Patna6SC6Nagpur5Raipur4Cochin3Orissa2Guwahati2Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 26341Section 40A(3)16Addition to Income16Limitation/Time-bar13Section 14711Section 80I10Condonation of Delay9Section 1518Exemption

DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S SYMBIOSIS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 326/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80I

condoned in similar cases, some of which are as follows : ITA 326/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 29 a. 2019 (10) TMI 235 - ITAT Chandigarh M/S East Bourne Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Versus Asstt. CIT, Circle Shimla ITA No. 301/Chd/2015 Dated August 9, 2019 b. 2019 (6) TMI 1045 – ITAT Chandigarh M/S Shree Ganesh Concast Group of Industries Vs The DCIT , Circle- Palampur

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

8
Section 2537
Section 2507
Disallowance7

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 992/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the alleged delay and proceed to decide the Cross Objections on merit in both the assessment years. 7. The Revenue has taken four grounds of appeal in each ITA No.992 & 993/CHD/2024 & CO 46 & 45/CHD/2024 A.Y.2017-18 & 2016-17 7 assessment year. In brief, its grievance revolves around a single issue and the issues pleaded in rest of the grounds

INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 602/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 602/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Indian Red Cross Society बनाम The DCIT(Exemptions) Circle-1, Chandigarh Red Cross Bhawan, Civil Lines, Bathinda-151001, Punjab स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAATI4900K अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hear

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 154Section 250

125 taxmann.com 75”, in which, relying upon the earlier decision of same Court in the case of “Gujarat Oil and Allied Welfare Trust Vs ITO (Exms)”, 201 ITR 325, wherein, it was held that provisions regarding furnishing of audit report with the return of income has to be treated as procedural provisions, substantial compliance would be suffice, if the Compliance

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 339/CHANDI/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: \nSh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

condonation of delay.\n5.\nSince the issue involved in all the appeals are identical,\n(except in ITA No. 673/Chd/2021 for AY 2015-16) wherein, the\norder had been passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act by CIT Exemptions,\nChandigarh, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are\ndisposed off for the sake of brevity.\n6.\nAppeal of the Assessee

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 337/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nSh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

condonation of delay.\n5.\nSince the issue involved in all the appeals are identical,\n(except in ITA No. 673/Chd/2021 for AY 2015-16) wherein, the\norder had been passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act by CIT Exemptions,\nChandigarh, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are\ndisposed off for the sake of brevity.\n6.\nAppeal of the Assessee

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 63/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nSh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

condonation of delay.\n\n5.\nSince the issue involved in all the appeals are identical,\n(except in ITA No. 673/Chd/2021 for AY 2015-16) wherein, the\norder had been passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act by CIT Exemptions,\nChandigarh, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are\ndisposed off for the sake of brevity.\n\n6.\nAppeal

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 338/CHANDI/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 263

condonation of delay.\n\n5.\nSince the issue involved in all the appeals are identical,\n(except in ITA No. 673/Chd/2021 for AY 2015-16) wherein, the\norder had been passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act by CIT Exemptions,\nChandigarh, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are\ndisposed off for the sake of brevity.\n\n6.\nAppeal

JAGJIT SINGH ,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PATIALA , PATIALA

In the result we set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the file of Ld

ITA 105/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Bearing No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1058720011(1) Dt. 13/12/2023 Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The “Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2011-12 & The Corresponding Previous Year Period Is From 01/04/2010 To 31/03/2011. 2. Factual Matrix

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 22Section 250Section 253

125 days and that also without issuance of any show cause notice to explain the delay which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that while filing the appeal in Form Number 35, it was specifically mentioned that the widowed mother of the assessee was suffering from chronic renal failure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections\nare dismissed

ITA 993/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the alleged delay\nand proceed to decide the Cross Objections on merit in both\nthe assessment years.\n7. The Revenue has taken four grounds of appeal in each\n assessment year. In brief, its grievance revolves around a\nsingle issue and the issues pleaded in rest of the grounds are\nperipheral arguments qua the central point. The common\nissue

SHRI TEK CHAND,KARNAL vs. ITO-WARD-2, KAITHAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/CHANDI/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: 02-04-2020. That The Appellant Prepared Appeal & Deposited Appeal Fee On 18-03-2020 As Per Challan Of Appeal Fee Attached With Appeal Form.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 148

delay of 35 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 6. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal : 1. The Appellant Sh. Tek Chand aged 70 year old is a Farmer and He and his Brother Sh. Ram Diya sold their Agri land of Rs. 60,22,000 on dated

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 148/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 146/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 147/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 3

condonation of delay. Appeal is therefore taken up for final hearing. Factual Matrix 4. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of commercial vehicles and is a public limited company. For the year under consideration which is A.Y. 2015-16 and the corresponding previous year period is from 01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015, the assessee company filed its return

SHRI SACHIN GOYAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1489/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1489/Chandi/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1490/Chandi/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sachin Goyal Acit- Circle-7 बनाम/ Vs. 29/1, The Mall Ludhiana. Ludhiana 141 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abwpg-3117-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri Pankaj Bhalla (Ca) & Vk Bhalla (Ca)- Ld Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010- 11 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana [Cit(A)] Dated 20-08-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 20-03-

For Appellant: S/Shri Pankaj Bhalla (CA) and VK BhallaFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

delay of one day in both the appeals which stand condoned. 2. It emerges that the assessee purchased certain land for Rs.469.98 Lacs out of which the payment of Rs.54.89 Lacs was made in cash. The land was held as stock-in-trade and accordingly, Ld. AO formed an opinion that the cash payment so made by the assessee would

SHRI SACHIN GOYAL,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-VII, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1490/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1489/Chandi/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1490/Chandi/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sachin Goyal Acit- Circle-7 बनाम/ Vs. 29/1, The Mall Ludhiana. Ludhiana 141 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abwpg-3117-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri Pankaj Bhalla (Ca) & Vk Bhalla (Ca)- Ld Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010- 11 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Which Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ludhiana [Cit(A)] Dated 20-08-2019 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 20-03-

For Appellant: S/Shri Pankaj Bhalla (CA) and VK BhallaFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 46A

delay of one day in both the appeals which stand condoned. 2. It emerges that the assessee purchased certain land for Rs.469.98 Lacs out of which the payment of Rs.54.89 Lacs was made in cash. The land was held as stock-in-trade and accordingly, Ld. AO formed an opinion that the cash payment so made by the assessee would

LATE KULPRAKASH BHARDWAJ THROUGH LEGAL HEIR KARTIKEYA BHARDWAJ,CENTRE POINT HOTEL, DHARAMSHALA, KANGRA vs. PCIT-1, CHANIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1241/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Deshpande, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, D.R
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 68

condone the delay for which sufficient cause is shown, and admit the appeal for adjudication. + 4. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned PCIT has erred in invoking revisionary powers u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating

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

ITA 127/CHANDI/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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.

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Doger, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(i)Section 194A(3)(v)Section 19iSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 253

125 T0 127/Chd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 TO 2018-19 The HP State Cooperative Bank Ltd. बनाम The ITO (TDS) Near Chawgan Nahan, Sirmour, Solan Himachal Pradesh-173001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: PTLT11473A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sachin Doger, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek

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

ITA 125/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nShri Sachin Doger, C.AFor Respondent: \nShri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194A(3)(v)Section 19iSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 253

125 TO 127/Chd/2020\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 TO 2018-19\n| The HP State Cooperative Bank Ltd.\nNear Chawgan Nahan, Sirmour,\nHimachal Pradesh-173001\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: PTLT11473A\nअपीलार्थी/ Appellant\nबनाम\nThe ITO (TDS)\nSolan\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nShri Sachin Doger, C.A\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Vivek Vardhan

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

ITA 126/CHANDI/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2017-18
Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 194A(3)(v)Section 19iSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 253

125 TO 127/Chd/2020\r\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 TO 2018-19\r\nThe HP State Cooperative Bank Ltd.\r\nNear Chawgan Nahan, Sirmour,\r\nHimachal Pradesh-173001\r\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: PTLT11473A\r\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\r\nबनाम\r\nThe ITO (TDS)\r\nSolan\r\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\r\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\r\nShri Sachin