Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.17 seconds)
State Bank Of India, Noida vs Addl. Cit (Tds), Ghaziabad on 11 April, 2018 cites

The Commissioner Of Income ... vs Central Bank Of India,Naya ... on 20 July, 2017

7. We have considered the sub missions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that an identical issue has already bee n adjudicated by the ITAT Delhi Bench 'F', New Delhi in ITA No. 1359/Del/2014 for the assess ment year 2006-07 in the case of Addl. CIT(TDS), Ghaziabad Vs Canara Bank, Sector-6, Noida wherein vide order dated 07.08.2015, it has been held as under:
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - P Mithal - Full Document

Oriental Bank Of Commerce vs Income Tax Officer on 13 October, 2005

12. We find that identical issue involving payment of interest by some banks to Ghaziabad Development Authority without tax withholding came up for consideration before the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in 4 ITA No. 4524/Del/2016 State Bank of India the case of Chief/Senior Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce vs. ITO. Vide its order dated 15.7.2011 in ITA No.2228/Del/2011, the Tribunal has held that the payment of interest by Oriental Bank of Commerce to Ghaziabad Development Authority is covered within the provisions of section 194A(3)(iii)(f) and, hence, there is no obligation for deduction of tax at source. Consequently, the order passed u/s 201(1) was set aside.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 17 - Cited by 14 - Full Document

Income Tax Officer vs J And K Bank Ltd. [Alongwith Ita Nos. ... on 9 March, 2005

Likewise view has been taken by the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal in ITO vs. the Branch Manager, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd., by its order dated 2.7.2012, a copy of which has also been placed on record. All these precedents support the proposition that the payment of interest by banks to the State Industrial Development Authorities does not require any deduction of tax at source in terms of section 194A(3)(iii)(f) and, hence, the failure to deduct tax at source on such interest cannot lead to the banks being treated as assessee in default. No material has been placed on record to demonstrate that all/any of the above orders have either been reversed or modified in any manner by the Hon'ble High Courts. Further, the ld. DR failed to point out any contrary decision. In vie w of the legal position discussed supra and these precedents, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was justified in reversing the order passed by the Addl. CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad declaring the assessee liable u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar Cites 34 - Cited by 61 - Full Document
1