SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI ,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXTEMPTION) , BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 28 (SC). In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 28 (SC). In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 by a delay of about 193 days. 6.4 ITA No. 106/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 by a delay of about 193 days. 6.4 ITA No. 106/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,VILLAGE KHIRIYA DEWAT POST KHIRIYA DEWAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 by a delay of about 193 days. 6.4 ITA No. 106/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 by a delay of about 193 days. 6.4 ITA No. 106/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

28 days. 6.2 ITA No. 104/Agr/2025 has been filed on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.07.2024 by a delay of about 148 days. 6.3 ITA No. 105/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 by a delay of about 193 days. 6.4 ITA No. 106/Agr/2025 has been preferred on 26.02.2025 against the impugned order dated

JAGVIR SINGH KUNTAL,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(2), MATHURA

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

section 69A of the Act. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has deposited total cash of Rs.50.12 lakhs in the bank account during the year under consideration and from 01.04.2016 till 08.11.2016, total cash of Rs.34,22,200/- was deposited by the assessee in the bank account and during the period 01.01.2017 to 31.03.2017, assessee has deposited cash

ANSHUL JAIN,MAINPURI vs. PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as per direction given hereinabove

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalpr.Cit-1, Anshul Jain, Agra. C/O Sri Shyam Narayan Vs. Jain, Mohalla Kabir Ganj, Bhogoan, Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh-205262. Pan-Aqgpj6059E (Appellant) (Respondent)

28-03-2022, was not served upon the appellant, as it was neither served on person, nor on the registered e-mail as shown on his e-filing portal. 2. That, the order under section 263 dated 31-03-2022, was not served upon the appellant, as it was neither served on person, nor on the registered e-mail

PANKAJ SUJORIA,MANSAROVAR COLONY vs. ITO 1(1), GWL, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Pankaj Sujoria, Vs. Ito, A-481, Mansarovar Ward-1(1), Colony, Shahpura, Gwalior Bhopal, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Arzps0280L Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. 3. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is challenging the action of the lower authorities in not granting the credit for TDS of Rs 32,318/-. Pankaj Sujoria 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused

SMT. SIMRANJEET SINGH,AGRA vs. PR.CIT., AGRA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalsmt. Simranjeet Singh Vs. Pr.Cit 158, Pratap Pura Sanjay Place, Agra Up- 282002 Agra 282002 Up "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Byeps9366J Appellant .. Respondent

Section 263 jurisdiction. The same stand reversed therefore in these peculiar facts and circumstances. 6. Delay of 28 days in filing this appeal is condoned

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

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee filed his return of income on 15.01.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 3,46,660/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee. The assessee as claimed, remained engaged as a scrap

DEEPAK KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O SHRI LATE RATAN LAL AGRAWAL,TIKAMGARH vs. ITO, TIKAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Deepak Kumar Agrawal, Vs. Ito, Ward No. 12, Purani Tikamgarh Tehsil, New Housing Board, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Axapa3069L Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs 15,25,500/- on Deepak Kumar Agrawal account of cash deposits in the bank account

OM PRAKASH,HATHRAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3)(4), HATHRAS, HATHRAS

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Om Prakash, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Village Baramai, Ward-4(3)(4), Sadabad, Hathras Hathras (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dkbpp7713K

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication in the interest of substantial justice. 3. The preliminary legal issue raised by the assessee is challenging the validity of assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Om Prakash 4. I have heard the rival submissions

RAGHUVIR SINGH,GWALIOR vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER ITO 1(3), GWALIOR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

sections 271(1)(c) and 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. We advert to the assessee’s quantum appeal ITA No. 205/Agr/2023. The delay of 131 days in filing the assessee’s instant appeals stands condoned as per his contentions/averments explaining reasonable cause

RAGHUVIR SINGH,GWALIOR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER , ITO GWALIOR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

sections 271(1)(c) and 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. We advert to the assessee’s quantum appeal ITA No. 205/Agr/2023. The delay of 131 days in filing the assessee’s instant appeals stands condoned as per his contentions/averments explaining reasonable cause

NAVIN CHAND,AGRA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed our direction

28,368/- disallowing the claim of exempt incomes of Rs. 3,23,600/- and deductions under chapter VI-A of Rs. 1,04,768/- without appreciating the fact of the case and against the principal of natural justice 4) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the impugned assessment

JAHNVI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD EXEMTION, AGRA RCC, AGRA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.141/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) M/S Jahnvi Educational Trust Ito (Exemption) बनाम/ Vs. 130, Sector-9, Avas Vikas Colony Aaykar Bhawan Mg Road Sikandra Up – 282007 Sanjay Placed, Agra "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabtj-1711-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra (Ca) - Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

delay of 7 days in the appeal which stand condoned. 2. The assessee being registered entity u/s 12AA filed return of income declaring deficit of Rs.18.92 Lacs. The trust is stated to be engaged in carrying out educational activities. The CPC denied the claim made by assessee u/s 11 on the ground that the details of registration u/s 12AB