M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. BANSAL SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,KANPUR vs. THE DCIT, CC-I, KANPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

270 to 276/LKW/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2016-17 M/s. Nikki Global Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income- Ltd. 1-9, KGF, Lajpat Nagar, Vs. Tax, Central circle-1, Kanpur- New Delhi-110024. 208002. (PAN: AAACN0244L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Amit Nigam, DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. SUDHANSHU TRIVEDI, LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 The Acit V. Sudhanshu Trivedi Lucknow 21/1013, Sector 21 Indira Nagar, Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Ackpt4164G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Amit Singh Chouhan, D.R. Respondent By: S/Shri Rajat Jain & Akshat Jain, Cas O R D E R

u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act : Rs.21,53,270/- Variation in respect of addition : Rs.1,36,00,000/- Total income : Rs.1,57,53,270/- ITA No.418/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 14 2.1 The AO also invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271

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

u/s 50C/142A in response to which Valuation Officer, Allahabad has estimated the FMV of lease property as on 04/10/2013 at Rs. 43,46,000/- against actual consideration of Rs. 31,45,000/- vide valuation report dt. 14/06/2024. The relevant para of Assessment Order is as under: 7. During the year under consideration, the assessee was found to have purchased

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

u/s 50C/142A in response to which Valuation Officer, Allahabad has estimated the FMV of lease property as on 04/10/2013 at Rs. 43,46,000/- against actual consideration of Rs. 31,45,000/- vide valuation report dt. 14/06/2024. The relevant para of Assessment Order is as under: 7. During the year under consideration, the assessee was found to have purchased

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

u/s 50C/142A in response to which Valuation Officer, Allahabad has estimated the FMV of lease property as on 04/10/2013 at Rs. 43,46,000/- against actual consideration of Rs. 31,45,000/- vide valuation report dt. 14/06/2024. The relevant para of Assessment Order is as under: 7. During the year under consideration, the assessee was found to have purchased