A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S RAKESH SHIVHARE & NISHA MITTAL, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain; and (ii) shares have been sold through recognized Stock Exchange after paying "STT" on their sale or bringing on record any material to support the suspicion. 11. In addition to above, in subsequent assessment years i.e. A.Y.s 2006-07 and onwards, even exemption allowable U/s 10(34) of the Act for any income by way of dividend from

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SHYAM SUNDER & MANISH TAORI, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain; and (ii) shares have been sold through recognized Stock Exchange after paying "STT" on their sale or bringing on record any material to support the suspicion. 11. In addition to above, in subsequent assessment years i.e. A.Y.s 2006-07 and onwards, even exemption allowable U/s 10(34) of the Act for any income by way of dividend from

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SUNIL KUMAR MITTAL & MAMTA MITTAL, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

gain; and (ii) shares have been sold through recognized Stock Exchange after paying "STT" on their sale or bringing on record any material to support the suspicion. 11. In addition to above, in subsequent assessment years i.e. A.Y.s 2006-07 and onwards, even exemption allowable U/s 10(34) of the Act for any income by way of dividend from

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)

capital gains and deposit of cash of Rs.15,62,500/- in his saving bank account and after adjusting Rs.14,50,000/- towards

SH. KULDEEP SRIVASTAVA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O., WARD-3(2), MATHURA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10

capital gains in assessee’s hands, we note that learned CIT(Appeals)’s detailed discussion to this effect reads as under : “5.9. The contention of the ld. AR that the income from sale of flats constructed on the land under consideration has been declared by the company, M/s. TechmanBuildwell Pvt. Ltd. And it has also been assessed in its hand

ITO 1(2), GWALIOR vs. SMT REENA AGRAWAL, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13

gains arising on account of transfer of any long term capital asset. (ii). The assessee within the period of one year before had purchased a capital asset or (iii). The assessee within the period of two years from the date of transfer of the capital asset the assessee purchases new asset or (iv). Within a period of three years, after

SHRI ATUL SRIVASTAVA,AGRA vs. PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

deposits and cash flow. 5. During the relevant previous year, Mutual Fund units worth Rs. 5,50,000/- were bought of Kotak Floater Fund. However, units worth Rs. 6 | P a g e ITA No.56 & 57/Agr/2022 2,50,000/- only have been disclosed in the Balance Sheet. The AO did not make inquiry in to the fact

SMT. SARIKA SRIVASTAVA,AGRA vs. PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

deposits and cash flow. 5. During the relevant previous year, Mutual Fund units worth Rs. 5,50,000/- were bought of Kotak Floater Fund. However, units worth Rs. 6 | P a g e ITA No.56 & 57/Agr/2022 2,50,000/- only have been disclosed in the Balance Sheet. The AO did not make inquiry in to the fact

AJAY KUMAR GUPTA (HUF),AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshajay Kumar Gupta (Huf), Vs. Income Tax Officer, F-163/1, Kamla Nagar, Ward-2(1)(1), Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajha4155K Assessee By : Shri Anurag Singha, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

capital gains - Rs. 6,06,669 4. The sale consideration of silver was received in cash to the tune of Rs. 33,28,500/- which was deposited

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed

cash deposits in savings bank account and assessee has also\ntransferred one or more property(ies) during the year\nOrder passed by A.O:-AO passed the order u/s 154 and made addition on the\nissue of long term capital gain

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

SHRI SIYARAM YADAV,MAINPURI vs. ITO 2(5), MAINPURI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

capital gains tax made by the A.O. at Rs. 17,38,000/- on the basis of stamp value under section 50C pending valuation report from the departmental valuer sought by A.O. is illegal and arbitrary.” 2. Apropos Ground No.2, according to the assessee, as is clear from the assessment order, no notice

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD 3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

cash deposits amounting to Rs.2,80,000/-, the AO estimated the assessee’s income from Rasleela at Rs.16,00,408/-, treating the same to be bogus. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), by virtue of the impugned order, estimated the assessee’s income from Rasleela at Rs.8 lac, by allowing 50% as expenditure and treating the same to have been

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

cash deposits amounting to Rs.2,80,000/-, the AO estimated the assessee’s income from Rasleela at Rs.16,00,408/-, treating the same to be bogus. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), by virtue of the impugned order, estimated the assessee’s income from Rasleela at Rs.8 lac, by allowing 50% as expenditure and treating the same to have been

RAMESHWAR DAYAL, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2),GWALIOR , GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Rameshwar Dayal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Chitrkoot Ward-3(2), Colony, Near Fojawali Gwalior School, Kotputli, Jaipur, 303 108, Rajasthan (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Afepa7981H Assessee By : Shri Devang Gargiega, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025

cash. Since assessee’s wife is illiterate and there was no savings Rameshwar Dayal bank account maintained in her individual capacity, the sale proceeds received thereon stood deposited in the joint bank account of the assessee and his wife. The assessee also submitted that the said agriculture land is situated more than 8 kilometres from the local limits of municipality

AJIT SINGH,SHIVPURI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No 263/Agr/2025 is allowed

cash advance without formal documentation or a POA, and that depositing the amount in the father's account instead of the sons' is improbable. 4.3 However, the circumstances explained by the Appellant (sons residing away, reliance on verbal authority in family matters, the nature of rural land transactions, subsequent formal documentation, and the recording of the advance in the sale

ARADHANA ANEJA,GWALIOR vs. ITO 2(3), GWALIOR

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.144/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Aradhna Aneja Ito 2(3) बनाम/ F-243, Harishankarpuram Gwalior Vs. Gwalior 474 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajgpa-9060-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025

cash deposits of Rs.16.65 Lacs as the income of the assessee for want of sufficient explanation from the assessee. The Ld. AO also assessed capital gains

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN,AGRA vs. ITO-1(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: : Shri A.D. Jainassessment Year: 2002-03

Capital Gain, Share application money, share money, gifts etc. On enquiries it has been found that modus operandi of M/s. Ayushi Stok Brokers (P) Ltd., Sanjay Place, Agra is to take cash from the beneficiary (assessee), deposit