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.

334 results for “TDS”+ Section 5(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi4,143Mumbai4,110Bangalore2,315Chennai1,529Kolkata1,239Pune990Ahmedabad829Hyderabad810Jaipur513Chandigarh454Indore446Karnataka334Raipur326Cochin297Visakhapatnam180Surat175Cuttack170Lucknow167Rajkot137Nagpur128Jabalpur111Amritsar79Dehradun76Jodhpur70Allahabad51Guwahati51Patna47Telangana46Agra44Ranchi44Panaji27SC21Varanasi17Kerala16Calcutta11Punjab & Haryana4Rajasthan4J&K4Orissa3Himachal Pradesh2Uttarakhand2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 26098Section 234E90TDS77Section 4023Section 201(1)22Deduction21Section 260A19Addition to Income13Section 194A12Section 195

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 10(5

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

Showing 1–20 of 334 · Page 1 of 17

...
11
Section 234C11
Disallowance11

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA/644/2018HC 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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5

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 10(5