New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 750 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

2015 (9) TMI 750 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT - TMI - TDS on interest u/s 194A - whether cannot be pressed in service against the State Bank of India - refund seeked with interest - Held that:- Once I.T.A.T. has opined that Section 194A(i) of the Income Tax Act is not applicable against the Bank on SRF deposit, then the same legal position would be applicable in the subsequent assessment years as well, unless of course, Section 194A(i) is amended or is substituted by any new law. Therefore, submissi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ision shall be taken within two weeks positively and if it is found that vide order dated 03.03.2015 amount of ₹ 97,85,37,937/- has been deleted against the assessee, amount of ₹ 44,36,57,686/- shall be refunded to the petitioner Bank along with interest as provided under Section 240 read with Section 244 of the Income Tax Act.

It is, however, clarified that unless and until order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been stayed or set aside by the higher Forum, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue having observed that Section 149A(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be pressed in service against the State Bank of India. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Bank, submits that judgment dated 18.07.2014 passed by the I.T.A.T., Delhi has not been stayed or set aside by the higher Forum and this judgment stands good as on day. He further contends that petitioner-Bank has moved several applications before the Income Tax A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun, amount of ₹ 97,85,38,937/- was directed to be deleted against the assessee/Bank, therefore, as on day no amount of ₹ 97,85,38,937/- is outstanding against the petitioner Bank, therefore, there is no question of adjustment or set off. Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, contended that he is not aware of the judgment passed on 03.03.2015. He further contends that if vide judgmen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version