BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS) on the ground that the assessee had failed to deduct tax\nat source in respect of reimbursements of LTC/LFC paid to the employees\nfor travelling abroad. As the reimbursements of LTC/LFC in respect of\nforeign travel of the employee is not exempt

STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH,KANPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS) on the ground that the assessee had failed to deduct tax\nat source in respect of reimbursements of LTC/LFC paid to the employees\nfor travelling abroad. As the reimbursements of LTC/LFC in respect of\nforeign travel of the employee is not exempt

STATE BANK OF INDIA, FUND SETTLEMENT OFFICE,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)-II, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS on LTC for visits by the employees to foreign countries. The Assessing Officer has held that the LTC u/s 10(5) is exempt

S.B.I RBO III (ADMIN OFFICE),KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS on LTC for visits by the employees to foreign countries. The Assessing Officer has held that the LTC u/s 10(5) is exempt

STATE BANK OF INDIA,,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS on LTC for visits by the employees to foreign countries. The Assessing Officer has held that the LTC u/s 10(5) is exempt

STATE BANK OF INDIA,,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS on LTC for visits by the employees to foreign countries. The Assessing Officer has held that the LTC u/s 10(5) is exempt

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JOINT ORGANISATION ,LUCKNOW vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

TDS at the rate specified therein. The proviso to aforestated section clearly exempts the payer from attracting any liability to deduct

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JOINT ORGANISATION ,LUCKNOW vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

TDS at the rate specified therein. The proviso to aforestated section clearly exempts the payer from attracting any liability to deduct

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JOINT ORGANISATION ,LUCKNOW vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

TDS at the rate specified therein. The proviso to aforestated section clearly exempts the payer from attracting any liability to deduct

BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS) on the ground that the assessee had failed to deduct tax at source in respect of reimbursements of LTC/LFC paid to the employees for travelling abroad. As the reimbursements of LTC/LFC in respect of foreign travel of the employee is not exempt

STETE BANK OF INDIA, SMECCC CODE-5030,KANPUR vs. ITO (TDS)-, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

TDS)-II on the ground that the assessee is in default for non-deduction of tax at source in respect of payment of Rs.2,11,598/- made to the employees on account of LFC for travelling abroad. As the reimbursements of LTC/LFC in respect of foreign travel of the employee is not exempt

STATE BANK OF INDIA, SMECCC-CODE-5030,KANPUR vs. ITO(TDS)-2, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

TDS)-II on the ground that the assessee is in default for non-deduction of tax at source in respect of payment of Rs.2,11,598/- made to the employees on account of LFC for travelling abroad. As the reimbursements of LTC/LFC in respect of foreign travel of the employee is not exempt

SHRI JASMINDER SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14

TDS on rent paid to Lucknow Development Authority, which the learned CIT(A) has upheld. Learned A. R. submitted that LDA is a registered charitable organization and income of the LSA is exempt

USHA YADAV,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 6(2), LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

exempt from Income-tax is not correct. This ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.4 Ground No.4, 5 & 6: These grounds related to TDS

USHA YADAV,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 6(2), LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

exempt from Income-tax is not correct. This ground of appeal is dismissed. 5.4 Ground No.4, 5 & 6: These grounds related to TDS

M/S. ELDECO EDEN PARK APARTMENTS OWNERS WELFARE & MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

exempt keeping in view the concept of mutuality. It was further argued that the disallowances made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non deduction of TDS

M/S. ELDECO EDEN PARK APARTMENTS OWNERS WELFARE & MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

exempt keeping in view the concept of mutuality. It was further argued that the disallowances made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non deduction of TDS

M/S. ELDECO EDEN PARK APARTMENTS OWNERS WELFARE & MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

exempt keeping in view the concept of mutuality. It was further argued that the disallowances made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non deduction of TDS