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

reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 and the validity of approvals granted under Section 153D. Additionally, disputes exist regarding the estimation of net profit rates, disallowances of expenses, and claims for deductions

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

reassessment proceedings started after the expiry of initial period are not maintainable and deserves to be set aside. Sri Gaurav Mahajan has tried to place the finding of the order dated 4.2.2016, wherein it has been recorded that non deduction

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

reassessment proceedings started after the expiry of initial period are not maintainable and deserves to be set aside. Sri Gaurav Mahajan has tried to place the finding of the order dated 4.2.2016, wherein it has been recorded that non deduction

ALL INDIA WOMENS CONFERENCE KANPUR,KANPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), CIVIL LINES KANPUR

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2022-23 All India Womens Conference V. The Income Tax Officer Kanpur Ward 1(1)(1) 16/4, Mahila Park, Civil Lines Civil Lines Sarsaiya Ghat, Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aacta1200E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.06.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Kolkata For Assessment Year 2022-23. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Society Registered Under The Societies Registration Act Xxi Of 1860 & Running Working Women’S Hostel At Subsidized Rate Under The Name & Style Of ‘All India Womens Conference’, Kanpur. The Assessee-Society Is Also Registered Under Section 10Ac Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’). During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society E-Filed Its Return Of Income, Declaring Nil Income. The Assessee-Society During The Year Under Consideration Had Shown Gross Receipts Of Rs.10,52,829/- And

reassessment proceedings, the benefit of sections 11 and 12 of the Act cannot be denied to the assessee. However, since the request of the Ld. A.R. is that the assessee should be allowed the benefit of ITA No.510/LKW/2024 Page 7 of 8 deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KANPUR vs. M.K.U PVT. LTD., KANPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

deductions have been placed on record was not correct. It was further observed that in the case of Little Angels Educational Society vs. ITO (2011) 336 ITR 413 (AP), the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court had held that a decision having effect on assessment, which was missed at the time of original assessment, but came to the knowledge

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

deduction of Rs.\n3164146/- is sustained\nconsidering the earlier order of\nCIT(A) dt. 19/12/2023.\n[Para 8.16 Page 102]\nAppeal filed by\nAssessee\nITA\n17/LKW/2024 &\nCO1/LKW/2025\n07.01.2025 along\nwith other legal\ngrounds.\n(A.2) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal\n(\"ITAT\" for short), separate paper books were filed from the assessee's side

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

In the result, appeals vide I

deduction of Rs.\n3164146/- is sustained\nconsidering the earlier order of\nCIT(A) dt. 19/12/2023.\n[Para 8.16 Page 102]\nAppeal filed by\nAssessee ITA\n17/LKW/2024 &\nCO1/LKW/2025\n07.01.2025 along\nwith other legal\ngrounds.\n\n(A.2) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal\n(\"ITAT\" for short), separate paper books were filed from the assessee

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

deduction of Rs.\n3164146/- is sustained\nconsidering the earlier order of\nCIT(A) dt. 19/12/2023.\n[Para 8.16 Page 102]\nAppeal filed by\nAssessee\nITA\n17/LKW/2024 &\nCO1/LKW/2025\n07.01.2025 along\nwith other legal\ngrounds.\n\n(A.2) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal\n(\"ITAT\" for short), separate paper books were filed from the assessee

M/S. BARROWS BLUE BELLS SCHOOL,BAHARAICH vs. THE I.T.O. (E), LUCKNOW

reassessment proceedings, the assessee had also\nsubmitted Form-10 before the AO, which also was in accordance\nwith law, inasmuch as, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held in the\ncase of CIT vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association [2001] 247 ITR\n201 (SC), that Form-10 could be furnished by the assessee upto\nthe stage of completion of assessment

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

deduction claimed. Issue No. 14 – AY 2022-23 Addition u/s 69A – Cash found Rs. 43,12,800/- That during the course of search cash amounting Rs. 35,31,800/- from business/residential place at 57, Laxmanpuri, Lucknow and cash amounting Rs. 7,81,000/- at Village Devarda, Belsar, Gondawere found and out of which

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

deduction claimed. Issue No. 14 – AY 2022-23 Addition u/s 69A – Cash found Rs. 43,12,800/- That during the course of search cash amounting Rs. 35,31,800/- from business/residential place at 57, Laxmanpuri, Lucknow and cash amounting Rs. 7,81,000/- at Village Devarda, Belsar, Gondawere found and out of which

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

deduction claimed. Issue No. 14 – AY 2022-23 Addition u/s 69A – Cash found Rs. 43,12,800/- That during the course of search cash amounting Rs. 35,31,800/- from business/residential place at 57, Laxmanpuri, Lucknow and cash amounting Rs. 7,81,000/- at Village Devarda, Belsar, Gondawere found and out of which

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

Reassessment Proceeding.\ndt. 05.09.2023, 08.02.2024, 11.03.2024, 16.03.2024,\n15.03.2024\n6. Original Assessment Order u/s 143(3) dt. 23.04.2021 and\nCIT(A) order u/s 250 dt. 25.06.2024\n7. Assessment Order u/s 147 dt. 28.03.2024\n8. Copy of Form-35\n9. Copy of Replies filed before CIT(A)-3, Lucknow dt.\n07.01.2025\n10. Copy of CIT(A)-3, Lucknow Order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BAREILLY vs. WAVE DISTILLERIES AND BREWERIES LIMITED, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

deducting from the proceeds on sale of liquor, (a) all the expenses incurred by M/s Wave Distilleries and Breweries Limited (WDBL); (b) applicable indirect taxes; and also (c) the reward of bottling charges as agreed upon as above, would be paid by M/s Wave Distilleries and Breweries Limited (WDBL) in favour of M/s UBL India. Here it would be relevant

NIRMAL SINGH,AYODHYA vs. ITO WARD-1,, FAIZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria & Sa. No. 07/Lkw/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita. No.83/Lkw/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Nirmal Singh The Income Tax Officer, V. 15/2/16, Janki Ghat, Ayodhya- Ward-1, 224123, Faizabad (Up). Cinema Road, Faizabad- New-224001. Pan:Bdsps4165C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri. Rakesh Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 24 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10 10 2024 O R D E R

reassessment it shall be deemed that an notice under any provision of this Act which is required to be served upon him has been duly served upon him in time in accordance with the provisions of this Act and such assessee shall be precluded from taking any objection in any proceeding or inquiry under this Act that the notice

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

deduction u/s 80P is allowable to the extent of ‘gross total income’ of the Appellant after any addition has been made. Reliance is placed on the order passed in appellant’s own case for the AY(s) 1998-99, 2009-10 and 2010-11. c. It is therefore, the submission of the Appellant that any addition made/confirmed

ACIT, CIRCLE 3, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. ANSHUMAN SINGH, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

reassess such income, other than the income involving matters which are the subject matters of any appeal, reference or revision, which is chargeable to tax and has escaped assessment.]\n\nExplanation 1.-Production before the Assessing Officer of account books or other evidence from which material evidence could with due diligence have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will

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

deduction u/s 80C of the Act of Rs.1,50,000/- and \nthereby confirming addit ion of Rs.1,50,000/- without looking into the \nactual investment made by the appellant according to the law. The \naddition of Rs.1,50,000/- is liable to be deleted. \n\n5. Because the Ld. CIT(A) Lucknow-III has erred on facts and law while