ASHOK KUMAR SINGH,GHAZIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (5), GHAZIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

TDS of Rs.94,211/- from salary given to the assessee. However, while remitting the TDS amount, the assessment

MANISH JAISWAL,GORAKHPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, (TDS), ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17 Mr. Manish Jaiswal, Addl.Cit (Tds), Prop. New Manish Medical V. Allahabad-211001, U.P. Agencies Pashupati Market, Gandhi Park, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan: Akdpj7675D (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS), Prop. New Manish Medical v. Allahabad-211001, U.P. Agencies Pashupati Market, Gandhi Park, Gorakhpur, U.P. PAN: AKDPJ7675D (Appellant

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA HUF,VARANASI vs. ACIT, CC, VARANASI

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2014-15 Vinod Kumar Gupta (Huf), V. Acit, 20, Raghunath Nagar, Mahmoorganj, Central Circle, Varanasi Varanasi, U.P. Pan-Aabhv1586P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. O.P. Shukla, Adv Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.03.2022 O R D E R

TDS who has wrongly uploaded these details of TDS in the PAN of the assessee. The learned AR has submitted

THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LTD.,GORAKHPUR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

TDS deducted, the AO disallowed 10% of expenses, i.e., Rs.7,20,834/- on adhoc basis. However, we notice that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 , GORAKHPUR vs. THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LIMITED, GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

TDS deducted, the AO disallowed 10% of expenses, i.e., Rs.7,20,834/- on adhoc basis. However, we notice that

DCIT,, GORAKHPUR vs. M/S MAHABIR JITE MILLS, LTD., GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

TDS deducted, the AO disallowed 10% of expenses, i.e., Rs.7,20,834/- on adhoc basis. However, we notice that

THE MAHABIR JUTE MILLS LIMITED,GORAKHPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 , GORAKHPUR

In the result, (i) the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed and for AY 2020-21 is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

TDS deducted, the AO disallowed 10% of expenses, i.e., Rs.7,20,834/- on adhoc basis. However, we notice that

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

TDS and if he has not deducted TDS, then interest would be payable till the date on which

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, ,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

TDS and if he has not deducted TDS, then interest would be payable till the date on which

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,CHANDAULI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 1, VARANASI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

TDS and if he has not deducted TDS, then interest would be payable till the date on which

JAIVEER SINGH,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 1,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, appeal filed by theassesseeis allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2014-15 Jaiveer Singh, Asstt. Commissioner Of Prop. Jvs Motors Income Tax, Range-1, V. H.No.514, Ramdhariniwas, Aayakarbhawan, Mohaddipur, Civil Lines, Gorakhpur-273001, U.P. Gorakhpur-273001,U.P. Pan:Avaps 3343R (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS, but the assessee failed to furnish names and addresses of the 3 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jaiveer Singh

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 02,, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS amount of Rs. 17,66,512/-out of total TDS of Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 2, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS amount of Rs. 17,66,512/-out of total TDS of Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami

M/S TIWARI CONSTRUCTIONS,SONEBHADRA vs. ITO, WARD -3(4), SONEBHADRA

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Tiwari Constructions Dibulganj, V. Income Tax Officer, Anpara, Sonebhadra, U.P. Ward-3(4), Sonebhadra Pan-Aafhj0966G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.06.2022

TDS of Rs.3,263/- and has also shown interest income received from bank of Rs. 19,082/-. The source

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (1),, VARANASI vs. PROMINENT DATAMATICS MARKETING PVT. LTD., , VARANASI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS Payable 73,500 5,76,674 8 Provision for 6,99,738 30,447 Taxation Total 30,19,86,328 21,97,16,115 I.T.A

RAMESH CHANDRA JAISWAL,GORAKHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2 (5), GORAKHPUR

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS on the same have already been deducted by the bank appropriately but certificate for the same is not provided

TULSIANI INFRAVENTURES PVT. LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VARANASI

In the result the addition of Rs

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklatulsiani Infrastructure Vs. Dc/Acit, Private Limited, 37, ‘Central Circle, Varanashi Elgin Road, Civil Lines, Aaykar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor Allahabad- 211001 Maqbool Alam Road, Varanasi - 221002 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadct8858R Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : V.K. Jindal & Ashish Jindal Respondent By : Robin Chaudhary Date Of Hearing 27.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: (Jm): The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.05.2023, Passed By Cit (Appeals) Lucknow-3 For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed In Sec. 153 R.W.S 143(3) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In Various Grounds Of Appeal The Assessee Has Challenged The Addition Of Rs.41,64,28,242/- As Against Rs.3,50,15,393/- Surrendered/Offered By The Assessee. It Has Been Stated In The Grounds That The Addition Has Been Made By The Ao By Extrapolating The Figure Of Alleged On-Money Noted In Seized Documents Which Was Rough Detail Of Amount Received/ Receivable From The Buyers For The Booking

TDS made: b. Other miscellaneous expenses c. Construction related expenses Net Undisclosed Income (1-2) 41,64,28,242 Page

SMT. SUDAMA DEVI L/H OF LATE LALCHAND YADAV,SONEBHADRA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Blesmt. Sudama Devi, Acit Circle-1, Varanasi. L/H Of Late Lalchand Yadav, Wie Colony Anpara, Sonebhadra, Uttar Pradesh- 231225

TDS deducted from the contract payments and a sum of Rs.16,07,030/- was claimed as refund. 3. The above