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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

disallowed and added to its total income and brought to tax accordingly. As the assessee company did not respond at all hence I have decided to add Rs.8,22,70,213/- to the total income of the assessee companyPenalty proceedings has been initiated u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliancewith the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 01, VARANASI vs. PERFECT TECNO COUNSULTANTS PVT. LTD. , VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Perfect Techno Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Aayakarbhawan, V. N-1/65-A, Narrotam Nagar Colony, M A Road, Varanasi- Nagwa, Lanka Varanasi-221005,U.P. 221002,U.P. Pan:Aagcp3236N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Sh. Amalendunath Mishra, Cit Dr Assessee By: Sh. Mohammad Ashraf, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.04.2023 O R D E R

53 ITR 225(SC) iii. Judgment and order of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of K. Mohammed v. ITO , reported in the case of (1977)107 ITR 808(Ker.) iv. Judgment and order of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Ranicherra Tea Co. Limited, reported in (1994)75 TAXMAN

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 01,, VARANASI vs. M/S RATANDEEP GOLD & DIAMOND PVT. LTD., CHANDAULI

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner M/S Ratandeep Gold & Diamond Of Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, M A Road, 19, New Mohal, Varanasi-211001, U.P. Near Balika Inter College, Mugalsarai, Chandauli- 232101, U.P. Pan:Aahcr4764Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 02/Vns/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 136/Vns/2020) Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Ratandeep Gold & The Deputy Commissioner Of Diamond Pvt. Ltd. V. Income Tax,Circle-1, M.A. Road 19, New Mohal, Varanasi-211001, U.P. Near Balika Inter College, Mugalsarai, Chandauli- 232101, U.P.

53,64,232/- out of total purchases made by the assessee, and no details were furnished by the assessee before the AO. It was submitted by ld. CIT DR that the AO invoked provisions of Section 69C. It was submitted that the AO did not asked any question on these unregistered purchases, while Ld. CIT(A) simply accepted the contentions

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U.P. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U.P. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U. P.. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U.P. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U.P. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

DY. C. I. T., CIRCLE - 1, GORAKHPUR vs. BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK NOW AMALGAMATED WITH BARODA U.P. BANK, GORAKHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

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

53,54,55 & 56/VNS/2023] Assessment Year:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Baroda Uttar Pradesh v. The Dy. Commissioner of Gramin Bank Income Tax Now Amalgamated with Circle-1 Baroda U.P. Bank Gorakhpur Buddh Vihar, Commercial Scheme, Taramandal Gorakhpur TAN/PAN:AAAJB1748G (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Department by: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT Assessee by: Shri

M/S BANARAS SWARN KALA KENDRA PVT. LTD.,,VARANASI vs. ACIT, CC, VARANASI

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Banaras Swarn Kala Kendra Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of Ck-65/70A, Bari Piari, V. Income Tax, Varanasi-221002, U.P. Central Circle, Aaykar Bhawan, M A Road, Varanasi-221002, U.P. Pan:Aaccb1623M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Shri A.K. Pandey, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2022

Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”). 2. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee in memo of appeal filed with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Varanasi (hereinafter called “the tribunal”), reads as under: 1 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Banaras Swarn Kala Kendra Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT, Central Circle, Varanasi 1. Because

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)

53,42,35,965 72,93,92,218 (ii) Opening Stock 3,11,49,464 1,77,86,299 4,89,35,763 (iii) Closing Stock (80,58,029) (1,22,98,980) (2,03,57,009) Raw Materials Consumed 75,79,70,972 45. Moreover, it was a case of scrutiny assessment and the assessment had been made after

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)

53,42,35,965 72,93,92,218 (ii) Opening Stock 3,11,49,464 1,77,86,299 4,89,35,763 (iii) Closing Stock (80,58,029) (1,22,98,980) (2,03,57,009) Raw Materials Consumed 75,79,70,972 45. Moreover, it was a case of scrutiny assessment and the assessment had been made after

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)

53,42,35,965 72,93,92,218 (ii) Opening Stock 3,11,49,464 1,77,86,299 4,89,35,763 (iii) Closing Stock (80,58,029) (1,22,98,980) (2,03,57,009) Raw Materials Consumed 75,79,70,972 45. Moreover, it was a case of scrutiny assessment and the assessment had been made after

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)

53,42,35,965 72,93,92,218 (ii) Opening Stock 3,11,49,464 1,77,86,299 4,89,35,763 (iii) Closing Stock (80,58,029) (1,22,98,980) (2,03,57,009) Raw Materials Consumed 75,79,70,972 45. Moreover, it was a case of scrutiny assessment and the assessment had been made after

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of benefit of exemption u/s 54F of ₹ 93,94,816/-. P a g e | 2 AY 2013-14 Shamimul Fatima 3.The brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had declared netlong term capital gain at ₹1,40,30,177/-. Which was claim as exemption u/s 54B of ₹ 53