M/S. SAHARA CITY HOMES,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 3(4), RANGE- 3, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Bareilly V. Ito-3(4) 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2472C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Amritsar V. Ito-3(4) 2, Sahara India Centre Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs4654E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Kanpur(I) V. Acit 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2468Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Sahara City Homes – Guwahati V. Acit 2, Sahara India Centre Range 3 Kapoorthala Complex Lucknow Aliganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abzfs2462E (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopening the completed assessment for Assessment Year 2011 – 12, on a protective basis, to safeguard the interests of the Revenue, the ld. D.R. has contended that a notice under section 148 of the Act may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an assessment or reassessment in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

reopening beyond four years: Besides, the assessee also relies on the following case laws- DRS Industries Pvt. Ltd. V. DCIT (2021) 322CTR (Mad.) 289 First Source Solution Ltd. V. ACIT (2021) 323CTR (Bom.) 18 Ananta Landmarks Pvt. Ltd. V. DCIT (2021) 323CTR (Bom.) 138 Page 12 of 87 I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 SaurabhNatvarlalSoparkar V. ACIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

reopening beyond four years: Besides, the assessee also relies on the following case laws- DRS Industries Pvt. Ltd. V. DCIT (2021) 322CTR (Mad.) 289 First Source Solution Ltd. V. ACIT (2021) 323CTR (Bom.) 18 Ananta Landmarks Pvt. Ltd. V. DCIT (2021) 323CTR (Bom.) 138 Page 12 of 87 I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 SaurabhNatvarlalSoparkar V. ACIT

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

reopening of proceedings provides a\nsafeguard against any potential prejudice due to the change of incumbent.\nOn the above discussion it can be easily concluded that:\nThe incumbent A.O. provided the assessee the opportunity of being heard\nbefore passing the assessment order.\nThe assessment order has been passed withing time limit.\nThe assessee did not raise the issue of time

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

In the result, appeals vide I

reopening of proceedings provides a\nsafeguard against any potential prejudice due to the change of incumbent.\n\nOn the above discussion it can be easily concluded that:\n\nThe incumbent A.O. provided the assessee the opportunity of being heard\nbefore passing the assessment order.\nThe assessment order has been passed withing time limit.\nThe assessee did not raise the issue

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

assessments were reopened under Section 147. The AO disallowed depreciation and computed income. The assessee challenged the reopening and the disallowances

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

disallowance on account of the fact that the registration of the trust had been cancelled by the Pr. CIT, Central, Lucknow.Similarly, the excess of income over expenditure had also been brought to tax only on this account. However, in the assessments for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, which were also reopened

MARGHOOB ALAM,KANPUR vs. DCUT, CC-II, KANPUR, KANPUR

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

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

reopened the cases of the assessees on the basis of an information of Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), wherein it was stated that the assessees were beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain on the scrip Twenty First Century Private Limited. The Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings show caused the assessees

NISHAT ARA,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, KANPUR

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

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

reopened the cases of the assessees on the basis of an information of Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), wherein it was stated that the assessees were beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain on the scrip Twenty First Century Private Limited. The Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings show caused the assessees

ZAIN ALAM,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- II, KANPUR

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

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

reopened the cases of the assessees on the basis of an information of Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), wherein it was stated that the assessees were beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain on the scrip Twenty First Century Private Limited. The Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings show caused the assessees

NAUSHEEN FARAH,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, KANPUR

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

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

reopened the cases of the assessees on the basis of an information of Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), wherein it was stated that the assessees were beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain on the scrip Twenty First Century Private Limited. The Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings show caused the assessees

SHAHEEN RABIA,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -II, KANPUR

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

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

reopened the cases of the assessees on the basis of an information of Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), wherein it was stated that the assessees were beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain on the scrip Twenty First Century Private Limited. The Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings show caused the assessees

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. ANKUR ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. ANKUR ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice

ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. MOHIT ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

reopening of an assessment cannot be asked for by the assessee on the ground that he had not furnished the Form-10 during the original assessment proceedings, this does not mean that when the revenue re-opens the assessment by invoking Section 147 of the said Act, the assessee would be remediless and would be barred from furnishing Form

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

reopening of an assessment cannot be asked for by the assessee on the ground that he had not furnished the Form-10 during the original assessment proceedings, this does not mean that when the revenue re-opens the assessment by invoking Section 147 of the said Act, the assessee would be remediless and would be barred from furnishing Form

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

disallowance on account of the fact that the\nregistration of the trust had been cancelled by the Pr. CIT, Central,\nLucknow.Similarly, the excess of income over expenditure had also been brought\nto tax only on this account. However, in the assessments for the assessment years\n2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, which were also reopened

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR vs. M/S.ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

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

reopening u/s 148 whereas the assessment in assessment year 2016-17 was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act and in all these three years similar additions, on the basis of same statement of the assessee, recorded u/s 133A, were made. It was submitted that during these three years the Assessing Officer appointed commission and obtained report from Kolkata