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.

193 results for “TDS”+ Section 29(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,486Mumbai2,447Bangalore1,369Chennai806Kolkata576Hyderabad381Ahmedabad376Pune237Jaipur223Raipur221Indore219Chandigarh198Karnataka193Cochin170Surat92Visakhapatnam82Rajkot77Nagpur68Lucknow67Cuttack55Amritsar43Ranchi41Guwahati38Jodhpur32Agra31Dehradun26Patna24Telangana21Panaji21SC14Allahabad13Kerala12Varanasi11Jabalpur10Calcutta5Uttarakhand2J&K2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 260131TDS29Section 260A20Section 1445Section 405Section 1924Section 153C4Section 143(3)4Section 9(1)(vii)4Deduction

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/667/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/642/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

Showing 1–20 of 193 · Page 1 of 10

...
3
Disallowance3
Addition to Income3

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/648/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/650/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/671/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/654/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/664/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/770/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/768/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/662/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/769/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/666/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/669/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/766/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/649/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/652/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/663/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/646/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/665/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/670/2018HC Karnataka17 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

2. Whether denial of exemption under Section 10(5) of the IT Act, 1961 read with Rule 2B of the IT Rules, 1962 of reimbursement of leave travel expenses as claimed by the employee of the Appellant was justifiable? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that in the light of the provisions of Section