VISHAL KANODIA,VARANASI vs. PCIT,, VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders, as well as various documents referred to before us from the paper book. As stated above, ld. PCIT has discussed at length about racket of various brokers providing bogus long term capital gains and the investigation report by the Investigation wing highlighting the complete

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders, as well as various documents referred to before us from the paper book. As stated above, ld. PCIT has discussed at length about racket of various brokers providing bogus long term capital gains and the investigation report by the Investigation wing highlighting the complete

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders, as well as various documents referred to before us from the paper book. As stated above, ld. PCIT has discussed at length about racket of various brokers providing bogus long term capital gains and the investigation report by the Investigation wing highlighting the complete

ANJU JHUNJHUNWALA,VARANASI vs. PCIT, VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders, as well as various documents referred to before us from the paper book. As stated above, ld. PCIT has discussed at length about racket of various brokers providing bogus long term capital gains and the investigation report by the Investigation wing highlighting the complete

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)

CAPITAL GAIN is wholly wrong and against the facts of the case. 3. That in any case the authorities below have not allowed the proper opportunity to explain the case. 4. That the authorities below have erred in holding the cost of acquisition of property to be nil as per provision of the Income Tax Act read with section

MANTRA MAJESTIQUE ASSOCIATES AOP,,VARANASI vs. PCIT, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2016-17 Mantra Majestique Associates, V. Pr. Cit Aop Allahabad Flat No.22, S-20/53-1 Sunderam Villa, Varuna Bridge Budha Vihar Colony Varanasi Tan/Pan:Aadam0702H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri V. K. Jindal, C.A. Respondent By: Smt. Abha Kala Chanda, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12 08 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01 09 2021 O R D E R

8. In ‘Balvinder Kumar vs. PCIT’, [2021] 125 taxmann.com 83 (Delhi – Trib.), it was held that in a case of Limited Scrutiny, the Assessing Officer could not go beyond the reason for which the matter was selected for Limited Scrutiny, thus, it would not be open to the PCIT to pass revisionary order under section

N.E. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES MULTI STATE PRIMARY CO-OPRATIVE BANK LTD., ,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 01,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2009-

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharay: 2009-10 Ay: 2013-14 Ay: 2014-15 N.E. Railway Employees Multi State V. Acit, Primary Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Range-1, Gorakhpur Railway Colony, Mohaddipur Road, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan-Aaajn0595P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Anil Kumar Pandey, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.06.2022 O R D E R

8. The CIT(A) has held that the assessee is not eligible for exemption under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld. The assessee has not disputed the fact that the assessee is a primary Cooperative Bank though a Multi-State primary Cooperative Bank and was also granted license

N.E. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES MULTI STATE PRIMARY COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 01, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2009-

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharay: 2009-10 Ay: 2013-14 Ay: 2014-15 N.E. Railway Employees Multi State V. Acit, Primary Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Range-1, Gorakhpur Railway Colony, Mohaddipur Road, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan-Aaajn0595P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Anil Kumar Pandey, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.06.2022 O R D E R

8. The CIT(A) has held that the assessee is not eligible for exemption under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld. The assessee has not disputed the fact that the assessee is a primary Cooperative Bank though a Multi-State primary Cooperative Bank and was also granted license

N.E. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES MULTI STATE PRIMARY COOPARATIVE BANK LTD.,,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 01,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2009-

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharay: 2009-10 Ay: 2013-14 Ay: 2014-15 N.E. Railway Employees Multi State V. Acit, Primary Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Range-1, Gorakhpur Railway Colony, Mohaddipur Road, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan-Aaajn0595P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Anil Kumar Pandey, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.06.2022 O R D E R

8. The CIT(A) has held that the assessee is not eligible for exemption under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld. The assessee has not disputed the fact that the assessee is a primary Cooperative Bank though a Multi-State primary Cooperative Bank and was also granted license

M/S AVANTIKA INFRAVENTURE (P) LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VARANASI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment Years

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

8. In this case the appellant has not submitted any explanation regarding the purpose of advancing Interest free advance to its sister concern. It was submitted that the money advanced by the appellant was used by M/s Grace Infraventures Ltd. for purchase of land and that both the entities are engaged in the same line of business. However the appellant

M/S AVANTIKA INFRAVENTURE (P) LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VARANASI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment Years

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

8. In this case the appellant has not submitted any explanation regarding the purpose of advancing Interest free advance to its sister concern. It was submitted that the money advanced by the appellant was used by M/s Grace Infraventures Ltd. for purchase of land and that both the entities are engaged in the same line of business. However the appellant