BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

43 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80P(2)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai730Bangalore554Cochin301Chennai266Pune158Ahmedabad107Kolkata102Delhi98Visakhapatnam81Panaji73Nagpur71Surat52Rajkot48Lucknow43Jaipur42Indore34Hyderabad30Raipur26Chandigarh24Varanasi10Jabalpur10Karnataka9Amritsar6Kerala5Jodhpur5Telangana5SC4Ranchi3Cuttack2Agra1Dehradun1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 80P115Deduction40Section 80P(2)(a)28Addition to Income27Natural Justice20Disallowance16Section 143(3)15Section 20115Section 139(1)13

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTII vs. ITO, BASTI

ITA 295/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowance of expenses of Rs.3508236/- by dismissing the appeal. ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 4 of 28 3. Because on the whole facts, circumstances of the case and materials on record, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in denying allowability of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)/ 80P(2)(a) (iii) of the Income tax act 1961, in respect of the assessed

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

Section 80A12
Section 143(1)12
Section 143(1)(a)10

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTI vs. ITO, , BASTI

ITA 294/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowance of expenses of Rs.3508236/- by dismissing the appeal. ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 4 of 28 3. Because on the whole facts, circumstances of the case and materials on record, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in denying allowability of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)/ 80P(2)(a) (iii) of the Income tax act 1961, in respect of the assessed

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 600/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R PER BENCH These three appeals have been filed against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC on 25.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2013-14) and 26.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2018-19) and 4.07.2025 (for the assessment year 2020-21), wherein the ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeals of the assessee against the various orders

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 599/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R PER BENCH These three appeals have been filed against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC on 25.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2013-14) and 26.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2018-19) and 4.07.2025 (for the assessment year 2020-21), wherein the ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeals of the assessee against the various orders

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 601/LKW/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R PER BENCH These three appeals have been filed against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC on 25.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2013-14) and 26.06.2025 (for the assessment year 2018-19) and 4.07.2025 (for the assessment year 2020-21), wherein the ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeals of the assessee against the various orders

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 260/LKW/2023[2003-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Dec 2025AY 2003-14

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

For Appellant: Shri D. D. Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142Section 142(2)(a)Section 153(2)(a)Section 271Section 80PSection 80P(2)

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Act has failed to appreciate that Appellant has been enjoying the benefit of section 80P(2) and the said deduction is not dependent on the quantification of claim made as any addition made to the income specified u/s 80P(2), the corresponding deduction automatically increases too and therefore, such additions create Tax Neutral

VIDYUT TRANSMISSION KARMACHARI VETAN BHOGI CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY,LUCKNOW vs. CPC BANGALORE/ITO-2(1), LUCKNOW

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 464/LKW/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R PER: ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. 1. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.464/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2019-20 against impugned appellate order dated 03/04/2025 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2019-20/1075453457(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. In this case, intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD.,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ACIT, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 351/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2019-20 Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Acit Sitapur/Cpc, V. Limited Income Tax Deptt., C/O Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj, Bengaluru-560500. Lakhimpur Kheri, U.P.-241001. Pan:Aawfs0887P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26 11 2024

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Lucknow dated 29.03.2024 for the assessment year 2019-20. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “(1) ‘That the Ld. C.I.T. (A), NFAC, erred on facts and in law in upholding the disallowance

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LIMITED RUPAPUR,HARDOI vs. THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT/NFAC, ACIT, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Koushlendra Tiwari, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 of the Act on 21.07.2025 partly allowing the appeal of the assessee against the orders of the ld. AO passed under section 143(3) for the assessment year 2018-19. The grounds of appeal

SHRAMIK VIKAS SAHKARI SHRRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.,KANPUR vs. AO CIRCLE 1(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/LKW/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2019-20 Shramik Vikas Sahkari V. The Assessing Officer Shrram Samvida Samiti Ltd, Circle 1(1)(1) 135-K-2, Nankari, Iit Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 08 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 234FSection 80ASection 80P

E R This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (hereinafter called “the ld. CIT(A”) in short) for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co- operative Society. The assessee filed its return

ACIT CIRLCE-1, LUCKNOW vs. U P COOPERATIVE SUGAR FACTORIES FEDERATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed\nfor statistical purposes

ITA 371/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Shyam Lal, CA
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

E BENCH MUMBAI\n6\nKALIANDAS UDYOG BHAVAN PREMISES\nVS INCOME TAX OFFICER 21(2)(1) MUMBAI\n(ITA NO. 6547/MUM/2017 SMC MUMBAI)\n7\nRENA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD, DIST. LATUR.\nVS PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 2, AURANGABAD\n(ITA NO 1249/PUN/2019) B-BΕNCH ITAT PUNE\n8\nMAJALGAON SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.\nVS CIT CIRCLE 3 AURANGABAD\n(ITA 308/PUN/2018

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD VIKRAMJOT BASTI,VIKRAMJOT vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER BASTI -NEW, INCOME TAX OFFICE BASTI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 486/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sahkari Ganna Vikas V. The Income Tax Officer Samiti Ltd. Basti Vikramjot, Basti (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aabas4611B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912. The Main Activity Of The Assessee Was Marketing Of Sugar Cane Grown By The Cane Growers, Who Were Members Of The Assessee-Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 21.03.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,73,170/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society Had Received Commission From Sugar Mills On Supply Of Sugar Cane Of Rs.70,16,032/-, Which Was Claimed As Exempt In Terms Of Section 80P(2)(A)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 05.12.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co- operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912. The main activity of the assessee was marketing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 34/LKW/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

E of section 14. Therefore, he held that, “commission received from sugar mills on the supply of sugar cane by the members of the society and the interest income earned out of surplus fund was assessable under the head, “income from other sources”. The ld. AO pointed out that the assessee had no income assessable under the head, “income from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S COOPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD, BALRAMPUR, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 243/LKW/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

E of section 14. Therefore, he held that, “commission received from sugar mills on the supply of sugar cane by the members of the society and the interest income earned out of surplus fund was assessable under the head, “income from other sources”. The ld. AO pointed out that the assessee had no income assessable under the head, “income from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 247/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

E of section 14. Therefore, he held that, “commission received from sugar mills on the supply of sugar cane by the members of the society and the interest income earned out of surplus fund was assessable under the head, “income from other sources”. The ld. AO pointed out that the assessee had no income assessable under the head, “income from

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD., LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 536/LKW/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)

E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 20/02/2015 in I.T.A. No.285, dated 06/04/2015 in I.T.A. No.474 and dated 07/05/2015 in I.T.A. Nos. 525, 536 & 540. 2. These appeals were earlier disposed of by separate orders of the Tribunal dated 23/06/2015, 04/12/2016, 04/12/2016, 03/03/2016

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SEHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 474/LKW/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)

E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 20/02/2015 in I.T.A. No.285, dated 06/04/2015 in I.T.A. No.474 and dated 07/05/2015 in I.T.A. Nos. 525, 536 & 540. 2. These appeals were earlier disposed of by separate orders of the Tribunal dated 23/06/2015, 04/12/2016, 04/12/2016, 03/03/2016

INCOME TAX OFFICER, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD., LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 285/LKW/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

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

Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)

E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 20/02/2015 in I.T.A. No.285, dated 06/04/2015 in I.T.A. No.474 and dated 07/05/2015 in I.T.A. Nos. 525, 536 & 540. 2. These appeals were earlier disposed of by separate orders of the Tribunal dated 23/06/2015, 04/12/2016, 04/12/2016, 03/03/2016

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S KHERI PHILIBHIT SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD., LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 540/LKW/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)

E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 20/02/2015 in I.T.A. No.285, dated 06/04/2015 in I.T.A. No.474 and dated 07/05/2015 in I.T.A. Nos. 525, 536 & 540. 2. These appeals were earlier disposed of by separate orders of the Tribunal dated 23/06/2015, 04/12/2016, 04/12/2016, 03/03/2016

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SEHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 525/LKW/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

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

Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)

E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 20/02/2015 in I.T.A. No.285, dated 06/04/2015 in I.T.A. No.474 and dated 07/05/2015 in I.T.A. Nos. 525, 536 & 540. 2. These appeals were earlier disposed of by separate orders of the Tribunal dated 23/06/2015, 04/12/2016, 04/12/2016, 03/03/2016