M/S SATISH COLD STORAGE,KANPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE1(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

rectification u/s. 154 for non filing of audit report or other evidence which could not be filed with the return of income. For the sake of completeness, the contents of Circular No.689 are reproduced below: I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 5 I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 6 I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 7 5. I further find

M/S SATISH COLD STORAGE,KANPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE1(1)(1), KANPUR, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

rectification u/s. 154 for non filing of audit report or other evidence which could not be filed with the return of income. For the sake of completeness, the contents of Circular No.689 are reproduced below: I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 5 I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 6 I.T.A. No.76/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2017-18 7 5. I further find

M/S SARASWATI SHEET GRAH,KANPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

disallowance arbitrarily made by the Ld. A.O., CPC Bangalore, amounting to Rs. I0,02,905/- claimed by the appellant under section 80IB vide Intimation under section 143(l)of the income Tax Act, 1961, and the Ld. A.O. CPC, Bangalore has also erred in law and on facts in rejecting the Rectification Application dated 26.02.2020 filed under section 154

M/S SARASWATI SHEET GRAH,KANPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

disallowance arbitrarily made by the Ld. A.O., CPC Bangalore, amounting to Rs. I0,02,905/- claimed by the appellant under section 80IB vide Intimation under section 143(l)of the income Tax Act, 1961, and the Ld. A.O. CPC, Bangalore has also erred in law and on facts in rejecting the Rectification Application dated 26.02.2020 filed under section 154

PREM MANOHAR GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KANPUR

In the result, appeal in I

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

154 of the IT Act, 1961. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not taking cognizance of the facts and submission made before him that the finding made by the Ld.CIT(A) in his order is erroneous and does not relate the appellants case and appellate proceedings. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in recording the finding

PREM MANOHAR GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KANPUR

In the result, appeal in I

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

154 of the IT Act, 1961. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not taking cognizance of the facts and submission made before him that the finding made by the Ld.CIT(A) in his order is erroneous and does not relate the appellants case and appellate proceedings. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in recording the finding

DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MORADABAD

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 is a mistake apparent from records not it is applicable on the old provisions or change of earlier opinion. 7. Any other ground of appeal which may be raised during the course of hearing of appeal.” 2. As the matter relates to common issues and since the assessment year 2014-15, is the first assessment year in question

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 is a mistake apparent from records not it is applicable on the old provisions or change of earlier opinion. 7. Any other ground of appeal which may be raised during the course of hearing of appeal.” 2. As the matter relates to common issues and since the assessment year 2014-15, is the first assessment year in question

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 is a mistake apparent from records not it is applicable on the old provisions or change of earlier opinion. 7. Any other ground of appeal which may be raised during the course of hearing of appeal.” 2. As the matter relates to common issues and since the assessment year 2014-15, is the first assessment year in question

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 is a mistake apparent from records not it is applicable on the old provisions or change of earlier opinion. 7. Any other ground of appeal which may be raised during the course of hearing of appeal.” 2. As the matter relates to common issues and since the assessment year 2014-15, is the first assessment year in question

U P SUGAR MILLS COGEN ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW vs. AO EXEMPTION CIRCLE , LUCKNOW

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.145/Lkw/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Up Sugar Mills Cogen Association, 403, Chintels House,16-Station Road, Lucknow, Up-226001 Pan: Aaatu2238A . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

rectification under section 154 of the Act if such adjustment falls outside the ambit of Section 143(1) of the Act. The Ld AR has also relied on the CBDT Circular No. 669 dt.25/10/1993 and CBDT Instruction no. 1814 dt. 04/04/1989 drawing our attention to prima facie disallowances that is permissible u/s

ITO-6(1), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,, LUCKNOW

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.261/Lkw/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1), Lucknow . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

disallowance viz; (1) ₹1,83,48,720/ provision of interest on loans obtained from Government and (2) ₹7,11,998/- towards depreciation claimed as per Company Law. Post assessment owning to Revenue Audit Objection [in brief ‘RAO’] the Ld. AO invoked his rectification jurisdiction by notice u/s 154

M/S. ADICON BUILDERS & PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(1), KANPUR

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

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2012-13

rectification. In view of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Act, the assessee, vide reply dated 09/12/2015, submitted that assessee had not deducted TDS on the transactions but had not claimed expenses in the profit & loss account. It was further submitted that question of disallowance

ACIT, RANGE-I, LUCKNOW vs. M/S APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Rectification of glaring mistake of Rs.21692680/-. Dismissed the Ground [Para 8.2 Page 51] Appeal filed by Assessee ITA dt. 17/LKW/2024 12.01.2024 Note: AO while passing the order u/s 154 dt. 02.02.2024 has rectified mistake. Not to be pressed APCO INFRATECH PVT LTD PAN: AADCA5639H AY 2018-19 CIT(A) Order dt. 22.08.2024 (against Order dt. 31/03/2023 u/s

ACIT, RANGE-I, LUCKNOW vs. M/S APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,, LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Rectification of glaring mistake of Rs. 21692680/-. Dismissed the Ground [Para 8.2 Page 51] Appeal Assessee filed by ITA 17/LKW/2024 dated 12.01.2024 Note: AO while passing the order u/s 154 dt. 02.02.2024 has rectified mistake. Not to be pressed APCO INFRATECH PVT LTD PAN: AADCA5639H AY 2018-19 CIT(A) Order dt. 22.08.2024 (against Order dt. 31/03/2023 u/s

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee then filed rectification application u/s 154 against the order passed

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee then filed rectification application u/s 154 against the order passed

LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee then filed rectification application u/s 154 against the order passed