VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question which has arisen in this appeals is with regard to claim of the assessee

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question which has arisen in this appeals is with regard to claim of the assessee

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question which has arisen in this appeals is with regard to claim of the assessee

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question which has arisen in this appeals is with regard to claim of the assessee

SARVESH KUMAR AGARWAL HUF,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

ANJU JHUNJHUNWALA,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

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

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.

price of unregistered purchase is already less than other purchases there remains no scope for suppression of profit in this respect. I have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Appellant submitted the reconciliation of the value of the stock found during the survey with the value of actual stock as per audited statement and no adverse inference

INDRA NARAYAN TRIPATHI,GORAKHPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 02,, GORAKHPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

143(2) and 142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO to the assessee, and there is no dispute so far issuance of these notices or service of these notices are concerned. We have observed that the assessee has purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.10 lakhs, which was registered on 13.12.2013 in the name