TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 32(2), 72 , 80 and 139(3) of the 1961 Act. The ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) . The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated before the Bench that there is an error in the figure of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation in the grounds of appeal filed by assessee

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD,,MIRZAPUR vs. JT. C.I.T.,, MIRZAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 . It was submitted that Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench’s decision in case of Mansarovar Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd v. DCIT, reported in (2010) 126 ITD 72(Lucknow) was a decision which was for ay prior to amendment made to Section 36(1)(viia) by Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD.,MIRZAPUR vs. ASSTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, MIRZAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 . It was submitted that Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench’s decision in case of Mansarovar Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd v. DCIT, reported in (2010) 126 ITD 72(Lucknow) was a decision which was for ay prior to amendment made to Section 36(1)(viia) by Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f

MEJA URJA NIGAM (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD-2 (2), ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for ay: 2015-16 and 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

2)(id) as income from other sources. The amendment made in 1988 has no relevance for the purpose of this case. We shall take this Act as it stood at the material time in the assessment year 1983-84. 11. The computation of income under each of the above six heads will have to be made independently and separately. There

ACIT CIRCLE-2, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S SHERWANI SUGAR SYNDICATE LTD., ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 1997-98 The Assistant Commissioner Of V. M/S Shervani Sugar Syndicate Income-Tax, Circle-2, Ltd., Allahabad, U.P. 28, South Road , Allahabad,U.P. Pan/Gir: 19-653-Cv-3480 New Pan: Not Available (Appellant) (Respondent)

56,519 Balance carried forward 5,84,741 The provisions of Rs. 2,43,260/- made for the year under consideration has been added back by ourselves in computing our total income for the Assessment Year 1997-98 as is duly verifiable for the statement showing computation of (Page 67 of PB) no further disallowance is called for because

COMMERCIAL AUTO SALES PVT.LTD,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee with tribunal in ITA No

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act. The assessee produced books of accounts and submitted details before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. The AO assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 1,56,71,370/- as against returned income of Rs. 1,51,92,320/- , wherein three additions were made by AO to the income

KESARWANI & CO.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

56(Kar), to hold that the introduction of provisions of section 153A was to avoid litigation proliferating on the issue of, “undisclosed income” and if the same controversy was raised under the new provisions, the avowed purpose of bringing the new provisions would be forfeited. Thus, relying on the said judgment, he held that the ld. AO had to compute

KESARWANI & C0,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

56(Kar), to hold that the introduction of provisions of section 153A was to avoid litigation proliferating on the issue of, “undisclosed income” and if the same controversy was raised under the new provisions, the avowed purpose of bringing the new provisions would be forfeited. Thus, relying on the said judgment, he held that the ld. AO had to compute

KESARWANI & C0.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT., ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

56(Kar), to hold that the introduction of provisions of section 153A was to avoid litigation proliferating on the issue of, “undisclosed income” and if the same controversy was raised under the new provisions, the avowed purpose of bringing the new provisions would be forfeited. Thus, relying on the said judgment, he held that the ld. AO had to compute