SARAS SANRAKSHAN SAMITI,LUCKNOW vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, LUCKNOW

ITA 371/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 June 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) had conducted necessary verification regarding the accounting method discrepancy. The CIT(A)'s order was passed ex parte, and the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable society following the cash system of accounting, had a discrepancy between interest income reported in Form 26AS and its own return. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) made an addition based on this difference without proper verification or opportunity for the assessee to explain.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of interest income discrepancy was justified when the assessee followed the cash system of accounting and was not given a proper opportunity to explain. Whether the authorities below erred by not verifying the accounting method difference.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.371/LKW/2026 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2018-19 against impugned appellate order dated 27.02.2026 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1086639223(1) of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“01. Because the authorities below have erred on facts and in law in making an addition of Rs.2,86,063/- on account of interest on deposits, such difference arising on account of interest actually received and as per Form No. 26AS, overlooking the fact that the assessee is following cash system of accounting, the disallowance made is misconceived, unwarranted, the addition made by the AO and upheld by the CIT

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 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →