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

disallowed and added to the income of the assessee for the reasons that no income tax was deducted at source u/s 194H on these expenses as is mandated under Chapter XVII-B of the 1961 Act. So far as remaining expenses claimed as Rebate Expenses while computing income chargeable to tax under the head ‘Profits and Gains of Business

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

disallowed and added to the income of the assessee for the reasons that no income tax was deducted at source u/s 194H on these expenses as is mandated under Chapter XVII-B of the 1961 Act. So far as remaining expenses claimed as Rebate Expenses while computing income chargeable to tax under the head ‘Profits and Gains of Business

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

disallowed and added to the income of the assessee for the reasons that no income tax was deducted at source u/s 194H on these expenses as is mandated under Chapter XVII-B of the 1961 Act. So far as remaining expenses claimed as Rebate Expenses while computing income chargeable to tax under the head ‘Profits and Gains of Business

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

income from business , and hence consequently should be disallowed by adding to income of the assessee and brought to income

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

income from business , and hence consequently should be disallowed by adding to income of the assessee and brought to income

ARUP BANERJI,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SH. SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

disallowance of set-off of loss from 'Derivative Trading ' of Rs. 1,57,21,804/- against the normal income from business

ASHISH DWIVEDI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO RANGE-1(1), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

disallowed the entire claim of expenditure and consequently made the addition of Rs.49,670/-. Therefore, the provisions of section 69 of the Income Tax Act are applicable on 3 the said addition. He has further submitted that the assessee has not declared the income from business

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)

business of the assessee and hence the additions to the tune of Rs. 1042/- was made by AO to the income of the assessee by disallowing

DINESH KUMAR SINGH,MIRZAPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

Business .The assessee filed its return of income with Revenue on 10.09.2016 for the impugned assessment year 2016-17 electronically , declaring income of Rs. 6,20,470/- . The case of the assessee was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act, and statutory notices

ARUP BANERJI,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2014-15 Arup Banerji, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 14/18, Elgin Road, Allahabad Income Tax, Circle-1, Allahabad Pan:Acupb7330A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.K. Jaiswal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dismissing His Appeal Against The Order Of The Dcit, Circle-1, Allahabad Passed On 30.12.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Holding That Appellant Does Not Want To Pursue The Appeal & Dismissing Appeal Ex- Party Without Affording An Adequate & Effective Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Allowing The Set-Off Of Loss From Derivative Trading Of Rs. 66,05,524/- Brought Forward From Assessment Year 2008-09 Against The Current Year Income Of Rs. 60,19,056/- Earned From Derivative Trading. 3. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Wrongly Conceived The Fact That Appellant Has Brought Forward Loss From Trading In 'Commodity Derivatives' As Per Clause (E) Of Section 43(5) Whereas The Appellant Has Brought Forward Loss From Trading In 'Derivative' As Per Clause

business income and therefore he has disallowed the carried forward losses under the head of Capital gains. We observe that

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

income’ as represented by (a)Disallowance out of provision for ‘bad debts’ : Rs, 1,70,81,955 Under section 36(1)(viia) (b) disallowance out of depreciation : : Rs. 1,14,416 was, inter-alia obliged under the law to look into the validity of the assessment order dated 23.03.2013 itself, as the same had a vital bearing on the decision

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

income’ as represented by (a)Disallowance out of provision for ‘bad debts’ : Rs, 1,70,81,955 Under section 36(1)(viia) (b) disallowance out of depreciation : : Rs. 1,14,416 was, inter-alia obliged under the law to look into the validity of the assessment order dated 23.03.2013 itself, as the same had a vital bearing on the decision

M/S MEZA FILLING STATION ,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , ALLAHABAD

In the result, Appeal i.e

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

business in the return of income filed u/s.139(1) then the said seized material which reveals the details of the transaction of the FY 2007 up to 07.12.2007 would not be considered as incriminating material to have any effect on determination of the total income of the assessee for these years. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer

M/S MEZA FILLING STATION ,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , ALLAHABAD

In the result, Appeal i.e

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

business in the return of income filed u/s.139(1) then the said seized material which reveals the details of the transaction of the FY 2007 up to 07.12.2007 would not be considered as incriminating material to have any effect on determination of the total income of the assessee for these years. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer

M/S MEZA FILLING STATION ,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , ALLAHABAD

In the result, Appeal i.e

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

business in the return of income filed u/s.139(1) then the said seized material which reveals the details of the transaction of the FY 2007 up to 07.12.2007 would not be considered as incriminating material to have any effect on determination of the total income of the assessee for these years. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer

M/S MEZA FILLING STATION ,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , ALLAHABAD

In the result, Appeal i.e

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

business in the return of income filed u/s.139(1) then the said seized material which reveals the details of the transaction of the FY 2007 up to 07.12.2007 would not be considered as incriminating material to have any effect on determination of the total income of the assessee for these years. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer

M/S MEZA FILLING STATION ,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , ALLAHABAD

In the result, Appeal i.e

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao

business in the return of income filed u/s.139(1) then the said seized material which reveals the details of the transaction of the FY 2007 up to 07.12.2007 would not be considered as incriminating material to have any effect on determination of the total income of the assessee for these years. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), ALLAHABAD vs. MONAD INFRASOLUTION LIMITED, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose and the Cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2015-16 Income Tax Officer, V. Monad Infrasolution Limited, Ward-2(2), Allahabad C-80 Gtb Nagar Kareli, Allahabad, 211016 U.P. Pan-Aajcm2155J (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/Alld/2021 In Assessment Year: 2015-16 Monad Infrasolution Limited, V. Income Tax Officer, C-80 Gtb Nagar Kareli, Ward-2(2), Allahabad Allahabad, 211016 U.P. Pan-Aajcm2155J (Appellant) (Respondent)

business and when the assessee has failed to discharge his onus, the AO has rightly disallowed these claims. 7. Similarly, the assessee has shown the current liability without giving the details and particulars of the sundry creditors as well as the other creditors and therefore, the claim of the assessee was not acceptable and liable to be disallowed

M/S UDVASIT BEROJGAR SAHAKARI SHRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.,,SONBHADRA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19

business income of the previous year? That was a case which related to assessment year 1984-85. The relevant accounting period ended on 30-6-1983. The Income-tax Officer disallowed