SH. SUKHVINDER SINGH,KANPUR vs. PR CIT, CENTRAL, KANPUR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

gain on sale of shares of M/s. Blue Circle Services Ltd on face value, without independent inquiry. The Ld. PCIT was of the view that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer showed non-application of mind on the documents and materials on record. The Ld. PCIT passed order dated 17.03.2020 under section 263 of the Act whereby

GENUS POWER INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITTED,NOIDA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTERAL), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

282 (S.C.); CIT vs.\nSunbeam Auto Limited 332 ITR 167 (Del.); CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma 335\nITR 83 (Del.); CIT vs. Vikas Polymers 236 CTR 476/194 Тахтап 57; Hari\nIron Trading Company vs. CIT, 263 ITR437 (P&H); Malabar Industrial Co.\nLtd. vs.CIT,243 ITR 83(S.C.); CIT vs. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages (P)\nLtd

DCIT, RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1) of the said section, so as to include a non-obstante clause in respect of other provisions of the Act and provide that and provide that no deduction shall be allowed in relation to exempt income, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other provisions of this Act. Applicability: This amendment is effective from

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1) of the said section, so as to include a non-obstante clause in respect of other provisions of the Act and provide that and provide that no deduction shall be allowed in relation to exempt income, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other provisions of this Act. Applicability: This amendment is effective from

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1) of the said section, so as to include a non-obstante clause in respect of other provisions of the Act and provide that and provide that no deduction shall be allowed in relation to exempt income, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other provisions of this Act. Applicability: This amendment is effective from

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1) of the said section, so as to include a non-obstante clause in respect of other provisions of the Act and provide that and provide that no deduction shall be allowed in relation to exempt income, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other provisions of this Act. Applicability: This amendment is effective from

U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT, RANGE-VI, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1) of the said section, so as to include a non-obstante clause in respect of other provisions of the Act and provide that and provide that no deduction shall be allowed in relation to exempt income, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other provisions of this Act. Applicability: This amendment is effective from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

1) held that section 80P provides partial exemption restricted to the specified, “earning” or, “income” in sub section (2) ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 and not the entire income. He quoted from the provisions of section 80P to point out that a cooperative society engaged in the marketing of agricultural produce grown by its members, shall qualify for deduction under this

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S COOPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD, BALRAMPUR, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

1) held that section 80P provides partial exemption restricted to the specified, “earning” or, “income” in sub section (2) ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 and not the entire income. He quoted from the provisions of section 80P to point out that a cooperative society engaged in the marketing of agricultural produce grown by its members, shall qualify for deduction under this

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

1) held that section 80P provides partial exemption restricted to the specified, “earning” or, “income” in sub section (2) ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 and not the entire income. He quoted from the provisions of section 80P to point out that a cooperative society engaged in the marketing of agricultural produce grown by its members, shall qualify for deduction under this

M/S RAJ KUMAR SINGH & CO.,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

gains and, hence for considering the actual credit or debit balances of the partners of the appellant firm as on 1.4.1989 these entries were, therefore, to be ignored. I hold sc. Now the second question arises whether after ignoring these entries the net result of the partners accounts as on 1.4.1989 gives a credit balance or a debit balance