INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), KANPUR vs. SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR AGARWAL, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

5. It is not in dispute, as noted in the Impugned Order, that the factual background in all the three appeals is quite similar. However, for the sake of convenience, the facts in respect of ITA 125/2020 are being noted and discussed elaborately. Briefly stated, the Respondent- Assessee is an individual who has derived income from interest on loan

AMITA GUPTA,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) was carried out in the premises of the assessee on 06.03.2013, in which it was found that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.26,58,74,399/- in her Bank Account No. 20763917010 maintained with Allahabad ITA Nos.463 & 464/LKW/2018 Page 2 of 11 Bank, Kahoo Kothi Branch, Kanpur

AMITA GUPTA,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) was carried out in the premises of the assessee on 06.03.2013, in which it was found that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.26,58,74,399/- in her Bank Account No. 20763917010 maintained with Allahabad ITA Nos.463 & 464/LKW/2018 Page 2 of 11 Bank, Kahoo Kothi Branch, Kanpur

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-2, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

68 of IT Act and alleged commission of Rs. 22,55,000/- @5% of the unsecured loan made u/s 69C of IT Act are hereby deleted. The grounds of appeal no. from (i) to (viii) are adjudicated accordingly and relief is allowed to the appellant.” OUR SUBMISSION: 23. That the appellant humbly submit before your honour that the issue

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

68 of IT Act and alleged commission of Rs. 22,55,000/- @5% of the unsecured loan made u/s 69C of IT Act are hereby deleted. The grounds of appeal no. from (i) to (viii) are adjudicated accordingly and relief is allowed to the appellant.” OUR SUBMISSION: 23. That the appellant humbly submit before your honour that the issue

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KANPUR, KANPUR vs. SHRI MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

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

Section 68 is that the assessee should file a valid confirmation. Valid confirmation has no specific format but it must contain name, complete address of the lender and PAN of the lender. The confirmation so filed must indicate complete details of transactions (like mode cash or cheque, with number date of cheque with bank details). The Assessing Officer have

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

133A [other than under sub-section (2A) of the said section], on or after the 1st day of April, 2021 but before the 1st day of September, 2024, the provisions of sections 147 to 151 shall apply as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024.] Further, AO while passing the order

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

133A [other than under sub-section (2A) of the said section], on or after the 1st day of April, 2021 but before the 1st day of September, 2024, the provisions of sections 147 to 151 shall apply as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024.] Further, AO while passing the order

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

133A [other than under sub-section (2A) of the said section], on or after the 1st day of April, 2021 but before the 1st day of September, 2024, the provisions of sections 147 to 151 shall apply as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024.] Further, AO while passing the order

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR vs. M/S.ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

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

5, 2012 8. Kishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai Vs. CIT reported in 88 ITR 293 9. Abdul Qayuam Vs. CIT reported in 184 ITR 4 10. CBDT Instruction No. 286/2/2003(Inv) It was submitted that the addition solely based upon the statement recorded during survey u/s 133A is not sufficient and assessee is entitled to retract from his offer

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR vs. M/S.ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

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

5, 2012 8. Kishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai Vs. CIT reported in 88 ITR 293 9. Abdul Qayuam Vs. CIT reported in 184 ITR 4 10. CBDT Instruction No. 286/2/2003(Inv) It was submitted that the addition solely based upon the statement recorded during survey u/s 133A is not sufficient and assessee is entitled to retract from his offer

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR vs. M/S.ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

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

5, 2012 8. Kishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai Vs. CIT reported in 88 ITR 293 9. Abdul Qayuam Vs. CIT reported in 184 ITR 4 10. CBDT Instruction No. 286/2/2003(Inv) It was submitted that the addition solely based upon the statement recorded during survey u/s 133A is not sufficient and assessee is entitled to retract from his offer

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE, KANPUR vs. M/S.ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

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

5, 2012 8. Kishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai Vs. CIT reported in 88 ITR 293 9. Abdul Qayuam Vs. CIT reported in 184 ITR 4 10. CBDT Instruction No. 286/2/2003(Inv) It was submitted that the addition solely based upon the statement recorded during survey u/s 133A is not sufficient and assessee is entitled to retract from his offer

M/S STANDARD FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT LTD,HAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-II, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 132(4) of the Act on 3rd August, 2015 and letter dated 31st July, 2015 issued by Sh. Madho Gopal Agarwal. The case was centralised as per the orders passed under section 127 of the Act and a notice under section 153A of the Act was issued on 6th September, 2016, which was duly served. Upon

SACHIN VERMA,HAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - II, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 132(4) of the Act on 3rd August, 2015 and letter dated 31st July, 2015 issued by Sh. Madho Gopal Agarwal. The case was centralised as per the orders passed under section 127 of the Act and a notice under section 153A of the Act was issued on 6th September, 2016, which was duly served. Upon

KAMAL KANT VERMA,HAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 132(4) of the Act on 3rd August, 2015 and letter dated 31st July, 2015 issued by Sh. Madho Gopal Agarwal. The case was centralised as per the orders passed under section 127 of the Act and a notice under section 153A of the Act was issued on 6th September, 2016, which was duly served. Upon

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

68 Gift from father Sh. S.N. PandeyRs.1,00,000/-\nThe Ld. AO made addition of Rs.1,00,000/- being gift received by\nAppellant from his father Shri Surya Narayan Pandey only on assumption\nand surmise ignoring the documents placed on record.\nThe Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- being bonafide\ngift received from his father

TULSI GRAMODYOG SEWA SAMITI,,LUCKNOW vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 12AA to the assessee society and as cancelled on a wrong premise, be withdrawn and the registration as granted earlier be restored. 08. Because without prejudice to the aforesaid grounds of appeal there is nothing on record, not even in the statement recorded at the time of survey; and also, not even the reports of the DCIT