VISHAL KANODIA,VARANASI vs. PCIT,, VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

30,510/-. The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny on the precise issue of examining long term capital gain on the sale of shares of M/s. Rander Corporation Ltd. The assessment was completed vide order dated 30/12/2016 u/s. 143(3) accepting the return of income and also the long term capital gain. 4. The ld. CIT on examination of records

GOPI KRISHNA VINOD KUMAR HUF,GORAKHPUR vs. PCIT,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

30,510/-. The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny on the precise issue of examining long term capital gain on the sale of shares of M/s. Rander Corporation Ltd. The assessment was completed vide order dated 30/12/2016 u/s. 143(3) accepting the return of income and also the long term capital gain. 4. The ld. CIT on examination of records

VINOD KUMAR SARAF HUF,GORAKHPUR vs. PCIT,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

30,510/-. The case was selected for compulsory scrutiny on the precise issue of examining long term capital gain on the sale of shares of M/s. Rander Corporation Ltd. The assessment was completed vide order dated 30/12/2016 u/s. 143(3) accepting the return of income and also the long term capital gain. 4. The ld. CIT on examination of records

SHAMIMUL FATIMA,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 02, GORAKHPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 54F of the Act. Since the primary condition was not fulfilled in this case, the question that whether the said amount was kept in CGAS or not, is of no consequence.” 6. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is seen that the assessee had sold agricultural land in March

RADHEY SHYAM,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the assesseein ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2012-13 Shriradheyshyam Income Tax Officer, 308, Sector 16, Avasvikas Colony V. Ward-2(3),Aayakarbhawan, Sikandra,Agra-282007, U.P.. Maqboolalam Road Pan:Aikps7948H Varanasi-221002,U.P.. (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an application explaining reasons for delay in filing this appeal late beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) , in which assessee has claimed that the assessee had sent the appeal, by Speed Post on 19th October, 2022 , while I.T.A. No.42/VNS/2022 Assessment Year:2012-13 3 RadheyShyam,Agra

M/S JAI AMBE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES,VARANASI vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), VARANASI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2019-2020 M/S Jai Ambe Agricultural The Dcit, Industries, Plot No. 211, V. Circle-2(1), Aayakar Bhawan, M A Marg, Churamanpur, Varanasi- Varanasi-221002,U.P. 221108,U.P. ( The Adi, Cpc, Bengaluru) Pan:Aahfj9428N (Appellant) (Respondent)

30 and 32 at page no. 9 and 10 of the paper book , and submitted that it is the employer’s responsibility to deposit the employer contribution as well as employee contribution with the fund, within the due date. The employer is entitled to recover the employee contribution from the salary of the employee. He referred to provisions of Section