M.W.S. & CO.,BHADOHI vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 M.W.S. & Co., Naya Bazar V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Road, Bhadohi-221401, Uttar Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Pradesh, India Bengaluru [Jurisdictional Assessing Pan-Aaffm2003E Officer Being Dy./Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Varanasi, U.P. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 2(24)(x) of the 1961 Act can be allowed and consequently there cannot be any question of entering further into Section 43B of the 1961 Act as the deduction at threshold level of Section 36(1)(va) of the 1961 Act is itself not available. This are the literal and strict interpretation of provisions

M.W.S. & CO.,BHADOHI vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 M.W.S. & Co., Naya Bazar V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Road, Bhadohi-221401, Uttar Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Pradesh, India Bengaluru [Jurisdictional Assessing Pan-Aaffm2003E Officer Being Dy./Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Varanasi, U.P. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 2(24)(x) of the 1961 Act can be allowed and consequently there cannot be any question of entering further into Section 43B of the 1961 Act as the deduction at threshold level of Section 36(1)(va) of the 1961 Act is itself not available. This are the literal and strict interpretation of provisions

BHUPENDRA NATH PANDEY,VARANASI vs. ACIT, R - 03, VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Bhupendra Nath Pandey Assistant Director Of Income 6-159/27, Kashi Enclave V. Tax (Cpc), Centralized Colony, Pahadiya Sarnath, Processing Center , Varanasi-221007, U.P. Bengaluru-560500 (The Acit, Range-3, Varanasi, U.P.) Pan:Ajfpp1273J (Appellant) (Respondent)

section (v) is with respect to and confined to a gratuity fund and does not have any relevance here. We, hence, answer the other questions of law framed, also against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. We dismiss the appeal, leaving the parties to suffer their respective costs." 10.3.10 Thus, it can be clearly seen that

M/S RUGS MART,VARANASI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 03, VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesseeis in ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Rugs Mart Deputy Commissioner Of Barhi Ewada V. Income Tax (Cpc), Centralized District Varanasi-221207 Processing Center , U.P. Bengaluru-560500 (The Dcit , Circle-3, Varanasi, U.P.) Pan:Aalfr4883R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 43B of the 1961 Act has a heading that certain deductions to be allowed only on actual payment basis and it starts with a non obstante clause that 'notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, a deduction otherwise allowable under this Act in respect of...'. Thus, it stipulates that deduction shall be allowed only

LAWKUSH SHARMA,SONEBHADRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (5), SONEBHADRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 Lawkush Sharma Assistant Director Of Income 14-495, V.V. Colony, V. Tax (Cpc), Centralized Shakti Nagar, Sonebhadra- Processing Center , 231222, U.P. Bengaluru-560500 Pan:Artps9822Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 43B of the 1961 Act has a heading that certain deductions to be allowed only on actual payment basis and it starts with a non obstante clause that 'notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, a deduction otherwise allowable under this Act in respect of...'. Thus, it stipulates that deduction shall be allowed only

UTKARSH SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD.,VARANASI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Utkarsh Small Finance National E-Assessment Centre, Bank Limited V. Delhi S-24/1-2, First Floor, Mahavir Nagar, Orderly Bazar, Near Mahavir Mandir, Varanasi- 221001, U.P. Pan:Aabcu9355J (Appellant) (Respondent)

139(1) of the 1961 Act. If we apply strict interpretation as is normally applied as there is no equity in tax laws, we have observed that the employee contribution received by an employer is treated as income under the provisions of Section 2(24)(x) of the 1961 Act , while deduction is allowed u/s 36(1)(va) read

MANISH JAISWAL,GORAKHPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, (TDS), ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17 Mr. Manish Jaiswal, Addl.Cit (Tds), Prop. New Manish Medical V. Allahabad-211001, U.P. Agencies Pashupati Market, Gandhi Park, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan: Akdpj7675D (Appellant) (Respondent)

68,250/- for the failure. During the course of appellate proceeding it was submitted that the appellant could not be considered as an assessee in default since the seller has furnished his return u/s 139 of the Act and has taken into account, the sale consideration in his computation of income and has paid the due tax on such income

KAMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF),VARANASI vs. A.C.I.T., C.C., VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2013-14 Assessment Year:2015-16 Assessment Year:2017-18 Assessment Year:2014-15 Assessment Year:2016-17 Kamal Kumar Agrawal (Huf) A.C.I.T., 46, Jawahar Nagar Extension, V. Central Circle, Bhelupur, Varanasi-221005,U.P. Varanasi. Pan:Aaghk4211B (Appellant) (Respondent)

139 on 23/03/2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,09,155/-. A search action u/s 132 of the Act took place on residential premises on 17/11/2017. During the search, it came to notice of the Revenue that the assessee is filing return of income declaring presumptive income u/s 44AD. However, not even a single bill/voucher, paper, employee details etc. were found

KAMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF),VARANASI vs. A.C.I.T., C.C., VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2013-14 Assessment Year:2015-16 Assessment Year:2017-18 Assessment Year:2014-15 Assessment Year:2016-17 Kamal Kumar Agrawal (Huf) A.C.I.T., 46, Jawahar Nagar Extension, V. Central Circle, Bhelupur, Varanasi-221005,U.P. Varanasi. Pan:Aaghk4211B (Appellant) (Respondent)

139 on 23/03/2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,09,155/-. A search action u/s 132 of the Act took place on residential premises on 17/11/2017. During the search, it came to notice of the Revenue that the assessee is filing return of income declaring presumptive income u/s 44AD. However, not even a single bill/voucher, paper, employee details etc. were found

KAMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF),VARANASI vs. A.C.I.T., C.C., VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2013-14 Assessment Year:2015-16 Assessment Year:2017-18 Assessment Year:2014-15 Assessment Year:2016-17 Kamal Kumar Agrawal (Huf) A.C.I.T., 46, Jawahar Nagar Extension, V. Central Circle, Bhelupur, Varanasi-221005,U.P. Varanasi. Pan:Aaghk4211B (Appellant) (Respondent)

139 on 23/03/2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,09,155/-. A search action u/s 132 of the Act took place on residential premises on 17/11/2017. During the search, it came to notice of the Revenue that the assessee is filing return of income declaring presumptive income u/s 44AD. However, not even a single bill/voucher, paper, employee details etc. were found

KAMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF),VARANASI vs. A.C.I.T., C.C.,, VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2013-14 Assessment Year:2015-16 Assessment Year:2017-18 Assessment Year:2014-15 Assessment Year:2016-17 Kamal Kumar Agrawal (Huf) A.C.I.T., 46, Jawahar Nagar Extension, V. Central Circle, Bhelupur, Varanasi-221005,U.P. Varanasi. Pan:Aaghk4211B (Appellant) (Respondent)

139 on 23/03/2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,09,155/-. A search action u/s 132 of the Act took place on residential premises on 17/11/2017. During the search, it came to notice of the Revenue that the assessee is filing return of income declaring presumptive income u/s 44AD. However, not even a single bill/voucher, paper, employee details etc. were found

KAMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF),VARANASI vs. A.C.I.T., C.C., VARANASI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA NO

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2013-14 Assessment Year:2015-16 Assessment Year:2017-18 Assessment Year:2014-15 Assessment Year:2016-17 Kamal Kumar Agrawal (Huf) A.C.I.T., 46, Jawahar Nagar Extension, V. Central Circle, Bhelupur, Varanasi-221005,U.P. Varanasi. Pan:Aaghk4211B (Appellant) (Respondent)

139 on 23/03/2014 declaring total income at Rs.2,09,155/-. A search action u/s 132 of the Act took place on residential premises on 17/11/2017. During the search, it came to notice of the Revenue that the assessee is filing return of income declaring presumptive income u/s 44AD. However, not even a single bill/voucher, paper, employee details etc. were found