VISHAL KANODIA,VARANASI vs. PCIT,, VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1/-to Rs. 19.95/- 30.50/- within a short period of time? (iii) Whether you have utilized the such types of brokers who were engaged in manipulating & rigging the prices of shares in order to provide benefit to shareholders ? (iv) As the same phenomenon reflecting in your case, please show cause as to why the exemption claimed under section

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1/-to Rs. 19.95/- 30.50/- within a short period of time? (iii) Whether you have utilized the such types of brokers who were engaged in manipulating & rigging the prices of shares in order to provide benefit to shareholders ? (iv) As the same phenomenon reflecting in your case, please show cause as to why the exemption claimed under section

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1/-to Rs. 19.95/- 30.50/- within a short period of time? (iii) Whether you have utilized the such types of brokers who were engaged in manipulating & rigging the prices of shares in order to provide benefit to shareholders ? (iv) As the same phenomenon reflecting in your case, please show cause as to why the exemption claimed under section

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

capital borrowed for the purposes of the business or profession" has to be allowed as a deduction in computing the income tax under Section 28 of the Act. 20. In Madhav Prasad Jantia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax U.P. AIR 1979 SC 1291, this Court held that the expression "for the purpose of business" occurring under the provision is wider

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

capital borrowed for the purposes of the business or profession" has to be allowed as a deduction in computing the income tax under Section 28 of the Act. 20. In Madhav Prasad Jantia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax U.P. AIR 1979 SC 1291, this Court held that the expression "for the purpose of business" occurring under the provision is wider

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

31,000/- and Long capital gain was worked out after indexation and index cost of improvement at Rs. 1,40,30,177/-. In so far as the claim of exemption u/s 54B is concerned of Rs. 53,50,300/- same is not dispute.In so far as claim is concerned, the assessee has claimed exemption on account

AWADHESH KUMAR,BALLIA vs. ITO, WARD - 2(4), BALLIA

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2016-17 Awadhesh Kumar, V. Income Tax Officer, Arya Samaj Road, Ballia, Ward-2(4), Ballia, U.P. Uttar Pradesh Pan-Athpk1294N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022 O R D E R

1. That in any view of the matter the assessment made on an income of Rs. 14,73,417/- by order dated 28-12-2018 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act is bad both on the facts and in law. 2. That in any view of the matter the addition