UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

TDS) as required by sub-section (2) of section 197A - Accordingly, Assessing Officer invoked section 40(a)(ia) and disallowed

DILLIP KUMAR NAYAK,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.330 & 339/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012 & 2012-2013) Shri Dilip Kumar Nayak, Vs. Jcit, Range-2, Bhubaneswar Plot No.270/A, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda, Odisha-751016 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aahpn 0352 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

TDS have not been deducted though the ld. AR submitted that in advertisement expenses the payment includes cost of the materials and in security service charges, they are paid in nature of salary and do not exceed the basic exemption limit for which no tax has been deducted. Further in respect of legal service, submission of the ld. AR that

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. ITO,WARD-2, ROURKELA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed partly

TDS under the head ‘Crane Expenses’ for both the assessment years under consideration. It is observed form the assessment order that the assessee has paid crane charges to one Saurav Mittal, without deducting tax at source and nor the assessee submitted the Form 26A to the prescribed authority as per rules. The coordinate bench of the Tribunal in case

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL,ROURKELA vs. ITO,WARD-2, ROURKELA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed partly

TDS under the head ‘Crane Expenses’ for both the assessment years under consideration. It is observed form the assessment order that the assessee has paid crane charges to one Saurav Mittal, without deducting tax at source and nor the assessee submitted the Form 26A to the prescribed authority as per rules. The coordinate bench of the Tribunal in case