VIJAY STONE PRODUCT,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

VIJAY STONE PRODUCT,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

VIJAY STONE PRODUCT,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, (CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

SUBHASH STONE PRODUCT (P) LTD.,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(C.C.), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

M/S JAI MAA SHARDA SERVICE STATION,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

VIJAY STONE PRODUCT,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD vs. VIJAY STONE PRODUCTS, SONEBHADRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, (CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD vs. VIJAY STONE PRODUCT, SONEBHADRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

M/S JAI MAA SHARDA SERVICE STATION,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

RAMJI VAISH,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

M/S SUBHASH STONE PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED,SONEBHADRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

96,55,770/-made on the basis of diaries do not constitute books of accounts as no evidence or any corroborative evidence found in support of the entries recorded in diary hence addition not is uncalled for. 12. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs.8,03,936/- as per 6.1 of the order by alleging seized annexure

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S KESARWANI & CO., ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

section 145(3). The Revenue is aggrieved that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to consider the disallowance that was made by the Revenue, after considering the seized material found during the course of search, while the assessee holds that the ld. CIT(A) ought not to have sustained an addition of Rs.100000/-, after he himself had held that

KESARWANI & CO.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

section 145(3). The Revenue is aggrieved that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to consider the disallowance that was made by the Revenue, after considering the seized material found during the course of search, while the assessee holds that the ld. CIT(A) ought not to have sustained an addition of Rs.100000/-, after he himself had held that