ARYAVART BANK,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, LUCKNOW
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 800/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13
Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2012-13 Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank, Vs. Dcit-Range 1, (Successor To Erstwhile Allahabad U.P. Lucknow Gramin Bank), Head Office, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Nbcc Commercial Complex, Vardan Khand, Gomti Nagar Extension, Lucknow Pan: Aaaju0568R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. C. Naresh, Fca Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Setting Aside The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer That Were Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 On 30.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Not Granting Opportunity To The Appellant Bank To Present The Case Through Video Conferencing As Specified Under Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020 Provided U/S. 250(68) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act"). The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Be Directed To Grant Personal Hearing Through Video Conferencing In The Interest Of Justice. Without Prejudice To The Above 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Proviso To Section 251(1)(A) & Setting Aside The Order To Ao Without Appreciating That The Order Was Not Passed U/S 144. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Din Was Issued In The Name Of Non-Existing Entity & Hence The Order Passed Is Invalid. Without Prejudice To The Above
For Appellant: Sh. C. Naresh, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 244ASection 250(68)Section 251(1)(a)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80P
TDS, interest u/s 244A, Interest u/s234A,
2348 and set off of brought forward losses.
10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not deciding on disallowance of amortization of premium on HTM securities.”
2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society engaged
