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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we Page 36 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) don’t see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

SHYAM SUNDER GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KANPUR

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

260/- was e-filed on through acknowledgement no.499539771280912. The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (herein after for .short referred as 'the Act'). Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and accordingly, notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 08.08.2013 was issued and served upon the assessee within

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we don't see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we don't see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowing the exemption claimed and assessing to tax the income of the assessee and the appellate authorities were justified in confirming the same. In such circumstances, we don't see any question of law arising in these appeals to be considered by this Court under Section 260

M/S. MEHENDIPUR BALAJI IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTREL CIRCLE- II, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Mahendipur Balaji Impex V. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle Ii 51/56, Sita Ram Market Kanpur Shakkarpatti, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aaecm7300C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23 05 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 05 2019 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Iv, Kanpur, Dated 22/11/2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, Taking The Following Effective Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Because The Learned Cit (Appeal) Was Wrong In Law & On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Appellant Against Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2016 Passed By Assessing Officer Central Circle Ii Kanpur In Respect Of Addition Of Rs.22,20,000/- Being Proportionate Disallowance Out Of Interest Paid. 2. Because On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Cit (Appeal) Should Have Deleted The Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.22,20,000/- As The Appellant Had Sufficient Surplus Fund By Way Of Share Capital & Reserve & Surplus & Should Have Also Allowed The Claim Of Brought Forward Of Rs.7,49,430/- Of Earlier Years.

260/- In computation of income, A.O has taken income as assessed under section 143(3) inspite of returned income under section 153C at Nil. The income adopted by A.O includes the addition of Rs.22,20,000/-. Thus, it is clear that addition of Rs.22,20,000/- has been taken by the A.O in the assessment under section 153C also. Further

U.P.COOPERATIVE FEDERATIONLTD,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-2(3), , LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.260/Lkw/2023 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2003-04 U.P. Cooperative Federation V. Income Tax Officer-2(3) Ltd Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Pcf Building, 32, Station Road, 57, Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow-226004. Hazratganj, Lucknow- 226001. Pan:Aaaau0373P अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri D. D. Chopra, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22 09 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 19 12 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

disallowances out of expenses. It therefore, implies that the learned Tribunal had set aside the assessment order dated 9.6.2006 and therefore, the limitation for passing fresh assessment order will be governed by the provisions under section 153(2A) of the Act which in this case subsisted upto 31.3.2010. b. To give effect to the order passed by this learned tribunal

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P FOREST CORPORATION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2016-17

disallowed the exemption u/s 11 and had rightly made the addition and in this respect relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the issue has been settled vide various orders of the Tribunal in favour of I.T.A. No.574/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 3 the assessee

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

section 260- A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.” I.T.A. No.61 to 65/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2012-13 31 4.10 We further find that the SLP filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.08.2021. 4.11 In the present cases, on the one hand

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

section 260- A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.” I.T.A. No.61 to 65/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2012-13 31 4.10 We further find that the SLP filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.08.2021. 4.11 In the present cases, on the one hand

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

section 260- A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.” I.T.A. No.61 to 65/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2012-13 31 4.10 We further find that the SLP filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.08.2021. 4.11 In the present cases, on the one hand

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

section 260- A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.” I.T.A. No.61 to 65/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2012-13 31 4.10 We further find that the SLP filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.08.2021. 4.11 In the present cases, on the one hand

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

section 260- A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.” I.T.A. No.61 to 65/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2012-13 31 4.10 We further find that the SLP filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.08.2021. 4.11 In the present cases, on the one hand