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

section 10(5) of the Act as under: 10. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income failing within any of the following clauses shall not be included ITA No. 145 & 146/JP/17 and S.A. No.04 & 05/JP/2017 State Bank of India, Jaipur Vs. ACIT, TDS

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

section 10(5) of the Act as under: 10. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income failing within any of the following clauses shall not be included ITA No. 145 & 146/JP/17 and S.A. No.04 & 05/JP/2017 State Bank of India, Jaipur Vs. ACIT, TDS

LEKHESHWAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,AYODHYA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2016-17 Lekheshwar Educational Trust V. Income Tax Officer Lekheshwar Complex Exemption Ward Naka By Pass Lucknow Faizabad (Ayodhya) Pan:Aaatl9836B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 09 2024 O R D E R

section 10(23C) of the Act, ITA No.146/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 6 the surplus income of Rs.23,89,867/- is taxable. The assessee has also shown an expense under the head “TDS

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

TDS were not applicable to this transaction and therefore, the Tribunal held that it was not an interest received by the assessee on loans/advances, within the meaning of section 2(7) of the Interest Tax Act. Therefore, it held that the provisions of section 5 of the Interest Tax Act were not attracted in respect of such interest. The Tribunal

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

section 10(5) The reimbursement has been allowed by the assessee to the employee in respect of the journey performed by her outside India. Therefore, such reimbursement was not exempt u/s 10(5) of I.T. Act and was liable for TDS

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

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee is held to be partly allowed

10 were not served on the principal officer of the\ncompany. However, the ld. CIT(A) turned down this ground of appeal by relying\nupon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT-1, Ahmedabad\nvs. Bhanji Kanji Shop 68 ITR 416 (Gujarat). Thereafter, it was argued that the\nassessee was not a credit

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

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

section 10(5)\nThe reimbursement has been allowed by the assessee to the employee in\nrespect of the journey performed by her outside India. Therefore, such\nreimbursement was not exempt u/s 10(5) of I.T. Act and was liable for TDS

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

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

section 10(5)\nThe reimbursement has been allowed by the assessee to the employee in\nrespect of the journey performed by her outside India. Therefore, such\nreimbursement was not exempt u/s 10(5) of I.T. Act and was liable for TDS

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

section 10(5)\nThe reimbursement has been allowed by the assessee to the employee in\nrespect of the journey performed by her outside India. Therefore, such\nreimbursement was not exempt u/s 10(5) of I.T. Act and was liable for TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

TDS pertaining to interest on unutilized funds and as per provisions of Sec. 198 & 199 of the I.T. Act, 1961 the above interest income is income of the assessee and not of the U.P. Govt. The Ld.CIT(A)-2, Lucknow has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 10(26B) Rs.29,10

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

10(5) of IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable cause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B of the Act 1961. 5. That the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned CIT (Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble Member, IITAT. 6. That the Learned CIT (Appeal) has erred

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

10(5) of the Act, the Assessing Page 4 of 12 I.T.A. No.390 & 391/Lkw/2023 Officer (TDS)-II created a demand of Rs.1,34,035/- under section

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

10(5) of the Act, the Assessing Page 4 of 12 I.T.A. No.390 & 391/Lkw/2023 Officer (TDS)-II created a demand of Rs.1,34,035/- under section

LUCKNOW EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,LUCKNOW vs. I.T.O., LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

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

10. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Provision for Development expenses of Rs. 31,48,19,010/-. 11. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 17,04,441/- on account of interest on late deposit of TDS. I.T.A. Nos.185

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

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

10. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Provision for Development expenses of Rs. 31,48,19,010/-. 11. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 17,04,441/- on account of interest on late deposit of TDS. I.T.A. Nos.185

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,LUCKNOW vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

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

10. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Provision for Development expenses of Rs. 31,48,19,010/-. 11. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 17,04,441/- on account of interest on late deposit of TDS. I.T.A. Nos.185

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

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

10. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Provision for Development expenses of Rs. 31,48,19,010/-. 11. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 17,04,441/- on account of interest on late deposit of TDS. I.T.A. Nos.185

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

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

10. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Provision for Development expenses of Rs. 31,48,19,010/-. 11. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 17,04,441/- on account of interest on late deposit of TDS. I.T.A. Nos.185