BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

disallowance of LTC/LTA under section 10(5) of IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable cause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B of the Act 1961.\n6. That the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned CIT(Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble Member, ITAT.\n7. That

BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

disallowance of LTC/LTA under section 10(5)\nof IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable\ncause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B\nof the Act 1961.\n\n6. That the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned\nCIT(Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble\nMember, ITAT

STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH,KANPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

disallowance of LTC/LTA under section 10(5)\nof IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable\ncause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B\nof the Act 1961.\n6.\nThat the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned\nCIT(Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble\nMember, ITAT.\n7.\nThat

STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH,KANPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

disallowance of LTC/LTA under section 10(5)\nof IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable\ncause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B\nof the Act 1961.\n6. That the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned\nCIT(Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble\nMember, ITAT.\n7. That

M/S APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. D/ACIT-1,CENTRAL-1, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeals vide

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

17-18 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years:2018-19 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.01/Lkw/2025 ( in I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years

M/S. APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT-1, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeals vide

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

17-18 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years:2018-19 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.01/Lkw/2025 ( in I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUCKNOW, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, ASHOK MARG, LUCKNOW vs. APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD., VIBHUTI KHAND GOMTI NAGAR LKO

In the result, appeals vide

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

17-18 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years:2018-19 A.C.I.T.-1, Vs. M/s APCO Infratech Pvt. Ltd., (Central-1), B-9, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. PAN:AADCA5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.01/Lkw/2025 ( in I.T.A. No.623/Lkw/2024 Assessment Years

BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

disallowance of LTC/LTA under section 10(5) of IT Act 1961, without appreciating that there was 'reasonable cause' for the said failure as per the provisions of Section 273B of the Act 1961. 6. That the grounds of appeal as pleaded before the Learned CIT(Appeal) are relied upon the appeal before the Hon'ble Member, ITAT. I.T.A. Nos.487

PANKAJ AGARWAL,KANPUR vs. JT.CIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), KANPUR

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

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2012-13 Pankaj Agarwal, 7/151, Ratan Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Majestic, Opp. Sony World, Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1), Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur-208002 Kanpur-208001 Pan:Abjfs4912R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma Sr Dr & Sh Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.04.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 21.08.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. Because The Cit (A) Has The Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.2,47,02,865/- On Account Of Loss In Trading In Derivatives Business Treating The Same As Capital Loss, As Against Assessee'S Claim Of Business Loss, To Be Set Off Against Other Business Income, Which Order Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, The Disallowance Made By The Ao & Upheld Be Deleted. 2. Because On A Proper Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Also On The Interpretation Of The Provisions Of Sec 43(5), It Would Be Found The Loss Of Rs.2,47,02,865/- On Account Of Trading In Derivative Is Neither A Speculative Loss Nor A Capital Loss, The Same Should Ought To Be Set Off Against Other Business Income, The Cit (A) Has Erred, In Treating The Same As Short Term Capital Loss.

d) stated that an eligible transaction in respect of trading in derivatives referred to in Clause (ac) of section 2 of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42 of 1956) carried out in a recognized stock exchange and Clause (e), an eligible transaction in respect of trading in commodity derivatives, carried out in a recognized stock exchange, which is chargeable

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee is held to be partly allowed

d) Rs.9,66,47,048:\nin relation to premium payable by the allottees of Industrial Sheds/sites\naggregating Rs.11,75,75,706 and in upholding the liability of the appellant to that\nextent.\n7.2 BECAUSE none of the two sums as mentioned above can be treated as\n'chargeable interest' under section 2(5) of the Act read with the definition

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

d). On the issue of accumulation under section 11(2), the ld. CIT DR invited our attention to paragraph 10.6.3 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) in which he pointed out that the ld. CIT(A)had elaborately discussed why specification of purpose was a requirement of section 11(2) of the Act and generality of the objects

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

d) and (13(3) of the Act.\n4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and the facts in not dealing with specific items of\nadditions made to the total income with reference to grounds on which such additions\nwhere made.\"\n2.1 In ITA No.534/Lkw/2014 and 535/Lkw/2014, the Assessee also\nsubsequently filed additional grounds of appeals as under

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

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

17\nand section 11 (2)(a) as the purpose of accumulation, makes it clear that the said\nprovision could not be operable, if the arguments of the assessee were accepted\nthat the notice of accumulation for the general objectives of trust were compliant\nwith the requirement of section 11(2). In the circumstances, after considering the\nprovisions of section

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2014-15 The Asstt. Commissioner V. M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd Of Income Tax B-9, Vibhuti Khand Central Circle Ii Gomti Nagar Lucnow Lucknow Pan:Aadca5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.19/Lkw/2017 [In Ita No.66/Lkw/2017] Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd V. The Asstt. Commissioner Of B-9, Vibhuti Khand Income Tax Gomti Nagar Central Circle Ii Lucknow Lucnow Pan:Aadca5639H (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

17. With regard to grounds No.4 and 5 of the appeal of the Revenue, relating to deletion of additions of Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.7,50,000/-, the ld. CIT(A) vide para 13.3 of his order held as under: “13.3 The AO has made adhoc disallowances of Rs.2,50,000/- out of various expenses and adhoc disallowance of Rs.7

M/S U.P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,KANPUR vs. ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, KANPUR

d) Rs.9,66,47,048: in relation to premium payable by the allottees of Industrial Sheds/sites aggregating Rs. 11,75,75,706 and in upholding the liability of the appellant to that extent. 7.2 BECAUSE none of the two sums as mentioned above can be treated as 'chargeable interest' under section 2(5) of the Act read with the definition

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

section 11(2), while directing the ld. AO to compute the income in the manner provided under section 11. Accordingly, additional ground number 2 does not seem to fit with the facts of the case and therefore it is also dismissed. This brings us to additional ground number 3 ie that the Ld CIT(A) has not considered whether

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

d) and (13(3) of the Act.\n\n4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and the facts in not dealing with specific items of\nadditions made to the total income with reference to grounds on which such additions\nwhere made.\n\n2.1 In ITA No.534/Lkw/2014 and 535/Lkw/2014, the Assessee also\nsubsequently filed additional grounds of appeals

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

d) and (13(3) of the Act.\n\n4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and the facts in not dealing with specific items of\nadditions made to the total income with reference to grounds on which such additions\nwhere made.\"\n\n2.1 In ITA No.534/Lkw/2014 and 535/Lkw/2014, the Assessee also\nsubsequently filed additional grounds of appeals