NEERAJ AGRAWAL,,MIRZAPUR vs. DCIT, MIRZAPUR

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. 6. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in confirming the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 whereas there is no specific order in the assessment order for charging such interest

DCIT CIRCLE-3, MIRZAPUR vs. SHRI NEERAJ AGRAWAL, MIRZAPUR

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

68 is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. 6. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in confirming the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 whereas there is no specific order in the assessment order for charging such interest

SHRI MAHAVEER CHARITABLE TRUST,ALLAHABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Mahaveer Charitable V. Commissioner Of Income Tax Trust (Exemption), Lucknow 46, Rajendra Nagar Balua Ghat, Allahabad Tan/Pan: Aahts9123K (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Pawan Jaiswal, C.A. Respondent By: Mr. Shantanu Dhamija, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2021 O R D E R

section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner opined that the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) was not made in accordance with the provisions of law and prima facie erroneous and prejudice to the interest of the Revenue. The Commissioner also observed that the AO erred in not charging interest u/s 234A and 234B

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

234B, & 234C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.113, 114, 115 & 129/Alld/2025 Assessment Years:2011-12 to 13-14 3 7. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in initiating the penalty proceedings against the Appellant under Section

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

234B, & 234C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.113, 114, 115 & 129/Alld/2025 Assessment Years:2011-12 to 13-14 3 7. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in initiating the penalty proceedings against the Appellant under Section

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

234B, & 234C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.113, 114, 115 & 129/Alld/2025 Assessment Years:2011-12 to 13-14 3 7. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in initiating the penalty proceedings against the Appellant under Section

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

234B, & 234C of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.113, 114, 115 & 129/Alld/2025 Assessment Years:2011-12 to 13-14 3 7. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in initiating the penalty proceedings against the Appellant under Section

POOJA GROVER,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CIR-2,, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and principle of natural justice.” 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case the assessee had filed her return of income on 28/09/2017 declaring total income at Rs.20,06,120/-. The case of the assessee

SUBHASH STONE PRODUCT (P) LTD.,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

M/S SUBHASH STONE PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

M/S JAI MAA SHARDA SERVICE STATION,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

M/S JAI MAA SHARDA SERVICE STATION,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD vs. VIJAY STONE PRODUCTS, SONEBHADRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD vs. VIJAY STONE PRODUCT, SONEBHADRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(C.C.), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, (CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act is highly unjustified.” 5. Subsequent to the filing of the grounds of appeal, the assessee on 6.08.2024 filed the following additional grounds of appeal which reads as under:- “1. That in any view of the matter the approval granted on the basis of draft assessment order by the Joint Commissioner of Income