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

reassessment proceeding covered by provision of section 147 to 151 where time for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) was left. Since the case of the assessee has already been considered as search case by Revenue in AY 2019-20 & AY 2020-21 while issuing notice u/s 148 directly without compliance of u/s 148A proceedings therefore

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

reassessment proceeding covered by provision of section 147 to 151 where time for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) was left. Since the case of the assessee has already been considered as search case by Revenue in AY 2019-20 & AY 2020-21 while issuing notice u/s 148 directly without compliance of u/s 148A proceedings therefore

KASHI NATH SETH SARRAF PRIVATE LIMITED,HARDOI vs. DCIT, SITAPUR, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for\nstatistical purposes

reassessment\nproceedings, u/s 147 of the Act. Moreover, Ld. Counsel for the\nassessee further contended that neither the Assessing Officer nor\nthe Ld. CIT(A) discussed or specified which of the two instalments\nof Rs.50,00,000/- was considered for the purpose of reopening

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

reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year was barred by the proviso to S. 147. Thus in view of the fact that the proviso has not been invoked by the Assessing officer, a serious jurisdictional error has been committed by the Assessing officer which leads to the Assessment order being a nullity

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

reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year was barred by the proviso to S. 147. Thus in view of the fact that the proviso has not been invoked by the Assessing officer, a serious jurisdictional error has been committed by the Assessing officer which leads to the Assessment order being a nullity

SHASHI INFRA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. ITO, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shashi Infra V. The Constructions Pvt Ltd Addl/Joint/Deputy/Asstt/Income 328B, 5Th Lane Rajendra Tax Officer, Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226004. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Tan/Pan:Aaucs5802M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

147 of the act, the Assessing Officer is obligated to follow the procedures contemplated and furnish the reasons for arriving a particular decision. In the present case, reasons are furnished for reopening of assessment. The objections should have been disposed of in a meaningful manner by the Ld Assessing Officer. The consideration of objections and the findings for reopening

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

u/s 143(3) for the relevant assessment year, the said re- assessment was re-opened only on fishing and roving enquiries.\n\nAPPELLANT'S SUBMISSION: -\n\n1. That, the instant proceedings have been undertaken under section 147 of the Income Tax Act,\nIncome escaping assessment.\n\n147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. ANKUR ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice u/s

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. ANKUR ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice u/s

ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. MOHIT ANAND, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyit(Ss) A Nos.336 & 337/Lkw/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Ankur Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Agppa4219C (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A No.334/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 Acit, Central Circle, Bareilly Vs. Mohit Anand Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, 148 Civil Lines, Bareilly, Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Abupa3002H (Appellant) (Respondent)

reopened under section 147 of the Act on the issue of LTCG and the claim was again accepted vide order dated 22.01.2018. For AY 2015-16, in the case of Shri Ankur Anand, the original return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the time limit for issuance of notice u/s

L.H SUGAR FACTORIES LTD.,PILIBHIT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice dated 29/03/2016 u/s 148 of the Act. Before issuing the aforesaid notice u/s 148, the Assessing Officer had recorded reasons. One of the reasons behind the reopening

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

reopening of the present case. The reasons recorded were primarily based on the audit objection report which in turn is based on the records which were already part of the earlier assessment and, therefore, the same was available with the AO and would tantamount to change of opinion. The Ld. A.R. submitted that for assessment year 2013- 14, the Assessing

VINAI SHUKLA,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT-1, LUCKNOW NEW, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.624/Lkw/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vinai Shukla V. Acit-1, Lucknow New 2/280, Vikas Khand Gomti Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226010. Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001. Pan:Asnps3558C अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Ms Shweta Mittal, Ca प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Prajesh Srivastava, Sr. Dr सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21 08 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 12 09 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

u/s 143(3) of the Act – 20.02.2021 Page 4 of 10 5. In the aforementioned background, now it is to be determined when would be the limitation expiring for framing the assessment. As per the Ld. Counsel, the assessment order should have been passed on as before 31st Dec, 2020. For the sake of clarity, the relevant provision

NISHA FAZAL,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ITO-4(3), KANPUR-01

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961, which was passed by the Id. ITO – 4(3), Kanpur, is out of\nhis / her jurisdiction, When the PAN jurisdiction was fall Ward – 1(2)\nGautam Budh Nagar from Assessment Year 2014-15.Further in the\n assessment year 2019-20 when the notice under section 148 of the\nIncome Tax Act, was issued, even

ALOK KUMAR RUNGTA,LUCKNOW vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15 Alok Kumar Rungta V. National Faceless Appeal B-40 Flat No.34 Manoram Centre Apartment Aliganj, Lucknow- Delhi. 226024. Pan:Ajqpr0755G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Prakash Agarwal, Advocate Shri Akshay Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28 10 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 01 2026 O R D E R

reopen the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on the same issues which were the subject matter of the original Page 3 of 8 assessment, namely, unsecured loans amounting to Rs.14,08,400/- and commission income of Rs.1,16,417/-. Thereafter, the AO, after issuing a draft assessment order, passed the impugned assessment order, thereby repeating

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

reassessment proceedings initiated u/s\n147/143(3) of the Act is without jurisdiction, bad in law and\nbe quashed.\n02. Because there being neither reason to believe nor any\nsatisfaction as contemplated u/s 147, nor there being any\nnew material, the CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the\ninitiation of the proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, the order\npassed

M/S UNIQUE INTERNATION,KANPUR vs. DY. CIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharym/S. Unique International The Dy. Cit, Circle- V. 980-D, Wazidpur, Jajmau, 1(1)(1) Kanpur-208010. Aaykar Bhawan, 16/69, Civil Lines, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Aaafu3756D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal Respondent By: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 19 02 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 03 2025 O R D E R

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without jurisdiction in absence of valid issuance of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 mandatorily required for reopening of assessment u/s 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the Id.AO has erred in reopening the assessment without jurisdiction as the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act required

GAGAN PREET KAUR VIRDI,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-6(2), LUCKNOW-NEW

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

u/s 147 of the Act are wholly deficient in meeting the requirement of law and consequently the ld. "CIT(A)"should have quashed the assessment order holding the assessment proceedings as void-ab-initio and the assessment order as illegal, bad in law and null and void. 1.2 BECAUSE reason to believe in pursuance of which the assessment was reopened