M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

ITA 4/LKW/2004Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 October 2025AY 1996-9723 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was neither a credit institution nor a financial company as defined under the Interest Tax Act. Therefore, the provisions of the Interest Tax Act were not attracted to the interest income received.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., received interest income from various sources. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under the Interest Tax Act, 1974, believing interest income had escaped assessment. The CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee qualifies as a 'credit institution' or 'financial company' under the Interest Tax Act, and if the interest income received is 'chargeable interest'.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(5),Section 2(5A),Section 2(5B),Section 2(7),Section 5,Section 10,Section 36(1)(viii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW

For Appellant: Adv & Shubham
Hearing: 17.07.2025Pronounced: 14.10.2025

PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.

These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Kanpur, both dated 23.02.2004, in which the ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeals of the assessee against the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer, passed under section 8(2) of the Interest Tax Act, 1974 on 1.03.2002. Since the issue involved in both these assessment years is similar and the cases were taken up for argument together, the same are disposed of by way of a common order. The grounds of appeal preferred in the two assessment years are as under: - A.Y. 1995-96 “1. BECAUSE the notice under

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 2(7)

All 56 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(7) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →