KAMAL KANT VERMA,HAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the learned assessing officer has erred in making addition arbitrarily without any relevance or nexus to the seized material. 4. That the assessment order passed by Ld. AO is without jurisdiction and bad in law as without valid and lawful approval u/s. 153D of the Income

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

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

153D of the Act cannot be revised u/s 263 of the Act.\n\n(C.2) It is not in dispute that no incriminating material was found from the assessee's premises during search under section 132 of the Act conducted in the case of the assessee, in respect of the issue on which assessment order of the Assessing Officer

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

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

153D of the Act cannot be revised u/s 263 of the Act. (C.2) It is not in dispute that no incriminating material was found from the assessee’s premises during search under section 132 of the Act conducted in the case of the assessee, in respect of the issue on which assessment order of the Assessing Officer has been

SHRI CHETAN SHARMA,KANPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), KANPUR

In the result, both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was given for passing the assessment order. Thus, it cannot be said that the order was passed without conducting necessary enquiries also it has been held by Hon’ble Kolkata Bench of the ITAT in Satish Kumar Lakhmani vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-10, Kolkata and Hill Queen Investment

M/S MODEL TANNERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANPUR

In the result, ITA No. 374/LKW/2017 is partly allowed while ITA No

disallowance is arbitrary and be deleted. 06. Because the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that sale proceeds of licence of Rs.2,31,21,485 and duty draw back Rs.95,10,794/- are all part of the revenue account relating to and belonging to the industrial undertaking and its activity the same is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB

M/S MODEL TANNERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANPUR

In the result, ITA No. 374/LKW/2017 is partly allowed while ITA No

disallowance is arbitrary and be deleted. 06. Because the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that sale proceeds of licence of Rs.2,31,21,485 and duty draw back Rs.95,10,794/- are all part of the revenue account relating to and belonging to the industrial undertaking and its activity the same is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB

M/S MODEL EXIM,KANPUR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriam/S. Model Exim Pcit (Central) V. 624-C, Defence Colony, 7/81-B, Tilak Nagar, Jajmau, Kanpur-208010. Kanpur. Pan:Aadfm6163H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Smt Namita S. Pandey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 29 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 11 2024 O R D E R

153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, therefore in view of the Judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar IT Appeal No. 192 of 2000 and Pr. Page 2 of 24 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur has no jurisdiction to pass the order under section 263 of the Income

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT, (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

under Section 153D. Additionally, disputes exist regarding the estimation of net profit rates, disallowances of expenses, and claims for deductions." } }

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

section 153D of the Act. Other issues involved the disallowance of deductions, estimation of net profit, and additions made without

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

153D of The Income Tax Act. The relevant paragraph of said order is reproduced here- “During the course of assessment proceedings it was noticed that the assessee has received corpus donation of Page 9 of 87 I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 Rs. 24,60,54,000/-. In order to verify the genuineness of this corpus donation

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

153D of The Income Tax Act. The relevant paragraph of said order is reproduced here- “During the course of assessment proceedings it was noticed that the assessee has received corpus donation of Page 9 of 87 I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 Rs. 24,60,54,000/-. In order to verify the genuineness of this corpus donation

KHANDELWAL SOYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,RAMPUR vs. ACIT(CENTERAL), BAREILLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nterms indicated hereinbefore

disallowance of Depreciation on addition to fixed assets\nduring the year.\n5. The assessee reserves the right to add/amend one or more ground of\nappeal during course of hearing.\"\n\nThe assessee has also raised the following additional\ngrounds of appeal: -\n\n“1. Because the approval given by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act, 1961 to\nthe order

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during search proceeding. Therefore, I am of the considered view

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during search proceeding. Therefore, I am of the considered view

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during search proceeding. Therefore, I am of the considered view