SMT. SARLA DEVI,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The following grounds have been raised: “1. Because the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly and illegally confirmed the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(l)(c) of the I. T. Act. 2. Because the assessee duly discharged her onus of proving the cash credits to be genuine. The addition

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

SONY RESIDENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,FIROZABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay in filing of appeals before me and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA Nos. 214 & 215/AGR/2025 Sony Residency Pvt. Ltd 3. I find that the assessment order has been framed under section 144, r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 20-9-2021 determining total income of the assessee at Rs 38,60,000/- as against

SONY RESIDENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,FIROZABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay in filing of appeals before me and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA Nos. 214 & 215/AGR/2025 Sony Residency Pvt. Ltd 3. I find that the assessment order has been framed under section 144, r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 20-9-2021 determining total income of the assessee at Rs 38,60,000/- as against

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

51- 66-90/Ag/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 52 City Center, BPLS11682G A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Barkhedahat, Guna 53- 68, 61, State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 57 City Center, BPLS11822G 85,,76,77 India, Branch- Gwalior /Ag/2018 Raghaogarh, A.Y.2013-14 Guna 58- ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 70 & 64 State Bank of 59 City Center, BPLS11718A /Ag/2018 India, Branch- Gwalior

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

51- 66-90/Ag/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 52 City Center, BPLS11682G A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Barkhedahat, Guna 53- 68, 61, State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 57 City Center, BPLS11822G 85,,76,77 India, Branch- Gwalior /Ag/2018 Raghaogarh, A.Y.2013-14 Guna 58- ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 70 & 64 State Bank of 59 City Center, BPLS11718A /Ag/2018 India, Branch- Gwalior