ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

disallowed and additions/disallowances be made to be income of the assessee and why the assessee may not be assessed accordingly. In response it was submitted that its activities of the assessee authority were of a charitable nature and the first proviso to section 2(15) was not applicable in its case. 7.2 The AO was not satisfied with the reply

UMRAO SINGH SMARAK SAMITI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, CPC, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 11 is not allowable. Accordingly, since the requisite conditions were not satisfied, order u/s 154 was correctly passed disallowing deduction claimed u/s. 11(1)(a). 7. Condonation of delay: The appellant has not filed the Audit report in Form- 10B along with the return and filed the same at a later date. The Board, vide CIRCULAR NO. 2/2020

KESARWANI MARKETING(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

11 and 12 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with the tribunal as not being pressed. We order accordingly. 5. Ground No. 3 and 4 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed concerns itself with disallowance of Rs.10,13,575/- as was made by the AO which disallowance stood reduced

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

11 and 12 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with the tribunal as not being pressed. We order accordingly. 5. Ground No. 3 and 4 raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed concerns itself with disallowance of Rs.10,13,575/- as was made by the AO which disallowance stood reduced

RAJESH KUMAR JAISWAL,,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY/ACIT(CENTRAL), ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: the query raised by the assessing authority vide questionnaire issued under section 142 (1) dated 23.01.2021, in assessment proceedings for the AY 2018-19.

6. Because the appellant was not given any opportunity of hearing by the assessing authority before making addition under section 69 and levying tax as per provisions of section 115BBE, which is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 7. Because learned CIT (A) erred in law as well as on facts, in confirming the denial of deduction claimed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD vs. JYOTI MEDISERVICES LTD., ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

6 (A.1) For the sake of convenience, these appeals are hereby disposed of through this consolidated order. At the time of hearing before us, at the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that these appeals are squarely covered by earlier order of the Allahabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Minto Developers Pvt. Ltd. (I.T.A

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

6 (A.1) For the sake of convenience, these appeals are hereby disposed of through this consolidated order. At the time of hearing before us, at the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that these appeals are squarely covered by earlier order of the Allahabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Minto Developers Pvt. Ltd. (I.T.A

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

6 (A.1) For the sake of convenience, these appeals are hereby disposed of through this consolidated order. At the time of hearing before us, at the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that these appeals are squarely covered by earlier order of the Allahabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Minto Developers Pvt. Ltd. (I.T.A

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, ,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

6 (A.1) For the sake of convenience, these appeals are hereby disposed of through this consolidated order. At the time of hearing before us, at the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that these appeals are squarely covered by earlier order of the Allahabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Minto Developers Pvt. Ltd. (I.T.A

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 147 of the Act. 11. BECAUSE after having verified all payments made by the appellant, there remains no scope of disallowance on ITA Nos.50, 51, 52, 53 & 54/ALLD/2023 & ITA Nos.5, 6