SUDHIR SHANKAR HALWASIYA,LUCKNOW vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide complete documentation to the lower authorities. However, to ensure substantial justice and fair play, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to submit necessary documentary evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income tax returns for AY 2020-21, 2022-23, and 2023-24 were selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made additions for disallowed interest expenses, non-deduction of TDS, disallowance of water charges, and under-reported rent income. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dismissed the assessee's appeals.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance of interest expenses and other additions made by the AO were justified, and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY
PER BENCH:
These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against the orders, all dated 30.01.2026, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Years 2020-21, 2022-23 and 2023-24. 2.0 Since the facts and the issues involved in the above captioned appeals are almost identical, therefore, they were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of through this common order for the sake of convenience.
1 First, we will deal with the issues involved in the case of the assessee in ITA No.214/LKW/2026 for assessment year 2020-21. ITA Nos.214, 215 & 216/LKW/2026 ITA Nos.214/LKW/2026:
2 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was engaged in the business of
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.
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 57
- Dattatraya Prakash Wankar, Solapur vs ITO WD-2(3), SolapurITA 2210/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Aurelia Housing Coperative Society Ltd… vs I.T.O., Ward - 49(4), KolkataITA 2198/KOL/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
- Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle…ITA 66/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Zidni Ilma Charitable Trust, Vadodara vs The ITO, Ward-Exemp, VadodaraITA 914/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Zidni Ilma Charitable Trust, Vadodara vs The ITO, Ward-Exemp, VadodaraITA 913/AHD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026