VISHAL KANODIA,VARANASI vs. PCIT,, VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. Detailed Reply/Submission, to query dated 05.07.2017, on 266-319 12.07.2017, with respect to exemption under section 10(38) duly supported by relevant case laws 320-322 10. Copy of Assessment order dated 21.07.2017 under section 143(3). 11. Copy of Show cause notice issued under section 263,dated 323-326 05.02.2020. 327-338 12. Reply to above show cause

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. Detailed Reply/Submission, to query dated 05.07.2017, on 266-319 12.07.2017, with respect to exemption under section 10(38) duly supported by relevant case laws 320-322 10. Copy of Assessment order dated 21.07.2017 under section 143(3). 11. Copy of Show cause notice issued under section 263,dated 323-326 05.02.2020. 327-338 12. Reply to above show cause

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. Detailed Reply/Submission, to query dated 05.07.2017, on 266-319 12.07.2017, with respect to exemption under section 10(38) duly supported by relevant case laws 320-322 10. Copy of Assessment order dated 21.07.2017 under section 143(3). 11. Copy of Show cause notice issued under section 263,dated 323-326 05.02.2020. 327-338 12. Reply to above show cause

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)

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

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)

9 RadheyShyam,Agra, U.P. v. ITO,Ward 2(3), Varanasi,U.P. I.T.A. No.42/VNS/2022 Assessment Year:2012-13 10 RadheyShyam,Agra, U.P. v. ITO,Ward 2(3), Varanasi,U.P. 5. Being aggrieved by appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal with the Tribunal. The assessee did not appear before I.T.A. No.42/VNS/2022 Assessment Year

M/S RAJENDRA PRASAD SRIVASTAVA,AZAMGARH vs. ACIT, RANGE - AZAMGARH, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Rajendra Prasad Srivastava, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Sarfuddinpur, Near Railway Tax, Range-Azamgarh Station, Azamgarh-276001 Pan-Aakfr2986A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh.Hari N. Singh Bisen, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2023

v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC) that a non- exercise of the power by the ITO under section 145(2) is also a decision inasmuch as it amounts to un acceptance of the method of accounting on the ground that the income, profits and gains can be properly deduced therefrom. It is therefore open