YOGENDRA SHARMA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ETAH

In the result, the appeal preferred by assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13 Yogendra Sharma, I-4695, 2Nd Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Floor, Gali No. 4-B, Balbir Nagar Ward 3(2), Etah. Extension, Shahdara, Delhi. Pan :Cgkps6492J (Appellant) (Respondent)

business of Rs.1,38,500/- against gross receipts of Rs.4,50,000/-. Besides above, the assessee has declared nil income from capital gains

RENU GOYAL,GWALIOR vs. JCIT- RANGE -2, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

income from house property, business & profession, capital gain and income from other sources. She filed her return of income on 29.07.2011, declaring

SANJANA GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO-WARD-2(3)(1) JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshsanjana Gupta, Vs. Ito, 130, Gudri Bazar, Jhansi Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Awbpg1536E Assessee By : Smt Prathna Jalan, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R

Capital Gains” in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 4. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee filed her return of income for AY 2014-15 on 03.8.2016 declaring total income of ₹2,42,850/-. As per the statement of facts filed before ld JCIT(A), the assessee is engaged

SARITA AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. ACIT, GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarmrs. Sarita Agrawal Acit Geeta Colony Aayakar Bhawan Dal Bazar, Gwalior- V. City Centre 474001 Gwalior-474001 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk3445P Appellant .. Respondent

Gain on shares on which STT is paid is not to be included in taxable income. Have addition of Rs. 115995/- is illegalunjustified and bad in law. 4. The appellate crave for adding , deleting and/or modifying any ground of appeal before its final hearing.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was carried

M/S CHATTA SUGAR CO. LTD,MATHURA vs. A.C.I..T CIRCLE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

gains under Case I of Schedule D". 5.3 Thus, when subsidy is received from a public fund and these are to assist the assessee to carry on or business, the object of subsidy is apparent i.e. to enable the assessee to run business more profitably, become more competitive etc. These are operational subsidies and not capital subsidies. The source from

SURENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,JHANSI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 80 and 255/Agr/2025 are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

business at Rs. 2,84,852/- and Rs.18,39,483/- as income from long term capital gains on the sale

SURENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,MAURANIPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 80 and 255/Agr/2025 are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

business at Rs. 2,84,852/- and Rs.18,39,483/- as income from long term capital gains on the sale

SURENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,MAURANIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHANSI

In the result, ITA No. 80 and 255/Agr/2025 are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

business at Rs. 2,84,852/- and Rs.18,39,483/- as income from long term capital gains on the sale

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER SHIVPURI, SHIVPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

income of the assessee, and the matter attained finality so far as chargeability to tax of the said short term capital gains are concerned. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee with regard to the sources of making investments to the tune of Rs. 32,30,790/-(peak investment) made by the assessee

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, SHIPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

income of the assessee, and the matter attained finality so far as chargeability to tax of the said short term capital gains are concerned. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee with regard to the sources of making investments to the tune of Rs. 32,30,790/-(peak investment) made by the assessee

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, GWALIOR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

income of the assessee, and the matter attained finality so far as chargeability to tax of the said short term capital gains are concerned. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee with regard to the sources of making investments to the tune of Rs. 32,30,790/-(peak investment) made by the assessee

BALDEV SINGH BHADORIYA,GWALIOR vs. ITO-3(2), GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Smt Kiran Lata Bhadoria, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- L/H Of Late Shri Baldev 3(2), Singh Bhadoria, Gwalior Mig-20, Darpan Colony, 474005, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ahopb3071D Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

capital gains, income from other sources and income from business and profession. During the year under consideration, the Assessee has purchased

SUNIL CHAUHAN,AGRA vs. DCIT CENTRE CIRCLE AGRA, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.165/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.152/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.153/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Sunil Chauhan Dcit Central Circle बनाम/ 9/47, Pokhar Para Agra Vs. Gali Agra 282 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Alvpc-9479-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Deependra Mohan (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025

capital gains’ as against ‘business income’ as offered by the assessee on presumptive basis u/s 44AD in the return of income

SH PRAKASH NARAYAN AGRAWAL ,GWALIOR vs. ACIT CIRCLE -2 , GWALIOR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalprakash Narayan Agrawal, Vs. Acit, Circle-2 D-55, Harishankar Puram Aayakar Bhawan, Gwalior – 474002 City Centre, Gwalior- 474011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abupa9961F Appellant .. Respondent

capital gain and holding profits from sale of shares of Rs.61,90,598/- as business income than capital gains, in the course

MARSHAL SECURITY SERVICES,AGRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

capital gain. Also verification of properties sale transaction was\nalso the issue. Still this bench did not allow crossing the limit without obtaining\nprior permission.\nd) Sukhdham Infrastructure LLP v. Income Tax Officer (2024) 165\nTaxmann.com 154 (Kolkata Trib.)\nIssue:-There were four issues to verify (i) Interest Expenses (ii) Income from\nreal Estate Business

RUBY JAIN,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(3), AGRA

In the result, the questions referred to us are answered as follows :

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshruby Jain, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 1/78A, Kale Ka Tall, Delhi Ward-1(1)(3), Gate, Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aevpj4936P Assessee By : Shri K. K. Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

gains or short-term capital loss to various persons by converting their unaccounted income into accounted income. Admittedly, HPC Biosciences Ltd was one of the scrip investigated by Kolkata Investigation Wing. Based on this investigation report, the ld Assessing Officer concluded that the sale proceeds received by the assessee on sale of 2800 shares of HPC Biosciences Ltd from

SURBHI ANAND,SOUTH DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2023-24] Surbhi Anand, Acit, C-155, Basement, Lajpat Circle-1(1)(1), Nagar-2, South Delhi, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Sanjay Place, Delhi-110024 Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282002 Pan-Acypa6580B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, Ca Respondent By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 Order, Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am

income from House Property, Business, Capital Gains and Other sources consisting of Interest and Dividend on investments. During the A.Y. 2018-19 the appellant

RADHA GUPTA,KALA MAHAL, AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1)(3), , AGRA

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2017-18

capital gain on sale of this silver bullion as the cost of silver bullion exceeds the sale price. Therefore, the assessee has not disclosed the sale of this silver bullion in her return of income. The assessee has sold some silver bullion through Shri Abhishek Bansal, the broker to unregistered persons. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee