DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JHANSI

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit - Central Circle Rajendra Kumar Aggarwal Room No. 104, Ist Floor 219, Daru Bhondela, Jhansi बनाम/ Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Sanjay Place 284002. Agra-282002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpa-1493-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur [Cit(A)] Dated 14-11-2022 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Dcit, Central Circle (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 31-03-2022. The Sole Grievance Of The Revenue Is Deletion Of Addition Of Rs.810 Lacs As Made By Ld. Ao In The Assessment Order.

cash deposits. To support the same, Ld. AO tabulated month wise sales data on Page Nos.12 & 13 of the assessment order. Though the assessee submitted stock details, purchase and sales summary etc. as required, Ld. AO rejected the explanation of the assessee and continued to allege that the assessee made bogus

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

purchased the property\nbut could not sale during the year under consideration.\n2. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and specific issue relating to 'High liabilities\nin the form of 250 Loan creditors' was pointed out by Ld. AO which amounts to Rs. 17,02,25,505/-\n3. The assessee during the course of assessment proceedings filed

SH. SRIDHAR PANDEY,AURAIYA vs. A.C.I.T.-2, AGRA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

bogus person. In fact the AO had conducted inquiries from him regarding the diary , which he had completely denied having anything to do with.Reading the contents of the diary as a whole and noting the fact that the diary was in the name of MrAlok Tiwari,theLd.CIT(A), we hold, has wrongly applied the presumption provided in section

SHRI SRIDHAR PANDEY S/O,AURAIYA vs. A.C.I.T.-2, AGRA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

bogus person. In fact the AO had conducted inquiries from him regarding the diary , which he had completely denied having anything to do with.Reading the contents of the diary as a whole and noting the fact that the diary was in the name of MrAlok Tiwari,theLd.CIT(A), we hold, has wrongly applied the presumption provided in section

SAGAR DWELLINGS P LTD,NEAR SUN TEMPLE GWALIOR vs. ACIT, FACELESS

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

deposited mostly through RTGS and immediately withdrawn in cash. The average balance in this bank account was Rs.1,01,024/- only. (ii). The field enquiries conducted by the Department revealed that no concern named M/s. Jai Baba Gurudev Traders ever existed at the given address, which was A-4/74, Singh Market, Parking Number-1, Transport Nagar, Near Krishna Lodge

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Anand Kumar Jain Vs. Income-Tax Officer, 30/41, Chhipitola Ward-1 (1)(1), Agra Agra Pan :Aarpj3189L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gaurav Goyal , Ca Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.02.2026 Order

bogus in nature. 5. Aggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. NFAC and filed a detailed submission. After considering the detailed submissions, the ld. CIT(Appeals) sustained the addition made the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before ITAT, raising following grounds: 3 | P a g e 1. That the Learned

HARI OM AGARWAL,KOLARAS vs. ITO SHIVPURI, ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

purchaser out of sale bill issue by the assessee without pointed out any specific item of expenditure which is not allowable, excessive and not related to business Thus the disallowance is against the principle of natural justice please be deleted 3 That under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALIGARH vs. SANJAY SINGH, ALIGARH

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.181/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.182/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income-Tax Officer Shri Sanjay Singh 4(1)(1), Aligarh. S/O Sh. Yogendra Singh, बनाम/ V.S. Enterprises, Gali No.1, Vs. Tikonia Nagla Road Sangam Vihar, Aligarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Gtrps-3169-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit/Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal Ita No.181/Agr/2023 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 29- 09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Vide Order Dated 22-04-2021. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Restoration Of Assessment Order. Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

cash deposit is not warranted since the same are in the course of assessee’s business only. The same are reflected in the very books of accounts which have been rejected by Ld. AO. In such a case, adding the same again would amount to double addition which is impermissible. The case laws as cited by Ld. CIT(A) duly

INCOME TAX OFFICER- 4(1)(1) , ALIGARH vs. SANJAY SINGH, ALIGARH

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.181/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.182/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income-Tax Officer Shri Sanjay Singh 4(1)(1), Aligarh. S/O Sh. Yogendra Singh, बनाम/ V.S. Enterprises, Gali No.1, Vs. Tikonia Nagla Road Sangam Vihar, Aligarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Gtrps-3169-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit/Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal Ita No.181/Agr/2023 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 29- 09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Vide Order Dated 22-04-2021. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Restoration Of Assessment Order. Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

cash deposit is not warranted since the same are in the course of assessee’s business only. The same are reflected in the very books of accounts which have been rejected by Ld. AO. In such a case, adding the same again would amount to double addition which is impermissible. The case laws as cited by Ld. CIT(A) duly

M/S SURAJHBAN OILS PVT.LTD,MORENA vs. ACIT- (CENTRAL CIRCLE), GWALIOR

Appeals is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalita No. 45/Agr./2022 (Assessment Year 2017-18)

cash deposit of Rs. 1,57,00,000/- in the Bank A/c of M/s Rameshwaram impex having account no. 35915050023 maintained with SBI Burra Bazar, Kolkata. During enquiry proceedings before DDIT (Inv), Unit -3(1), Kolkata Proprietors of various concerns including Shri Kamal Burman, Proprietor of M/s Kashi Impex and other concerns were also appeared and examined. Statements of various

SH. VIRENDRA KUMAR JAIN,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LALITPUR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

cash deposits, withdrawals, and TDS/TCS data, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 147 and issued notice u/s 148. Explanations/replies offered by assessee with respect to above information stood accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, it was further gathered from the said information that the assessee had shown bogus sales of Rs.1,18,52,322/- to M/s. Mahaveer Prasad Suresh