DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA vs. ALNOOR EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

established by the Assessee thereon. Accordingly, the Learned AO in the remand report justified the disallowance made in the assessment. ITA Nos. 273 & 274/AGR/2024 Alnoor Exports 6. The Assessee filed another written submission dated 26-02-2018 before the ld CITA stating that the time provided to the parties for responding to the notice under section

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),AGRA, AGRA vs. EMCO EXPORTS, AGRA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

permanent establishment) in India, as there is no office or any staff in India. Copy of Italian citizenship of foreign agent and copy of Income-tax declaration of foreign agent was also filed. This apart, the 2 | P a g e copy of agreement executed between the foreign agent Pro-Moda Srl Italy and assessee, M/s. Emco Exports for calendar

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowed / added such expenditure / receipts in the assessee's income and Expenditure Account. Since the exemption to the assessee (appellant) u/s 11 has been denied by the AO in view of proviso to section 2(15) read with section 13(8), therefore the assessee's income has been assessed under the head income from Business or Profession' and such total

MANISH MAHESHWARI,GWALIOR vs. JCIT RANGE-2, GWALIOR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Him Though Specific Request Was Made To Admit The Same. Ground No. 2 (I) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Wrongly, Illegally & Arbitrarily Confirmed Theaddition Of Rs. 67,530/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 40A(3) Of The Income Tax Act. (Ii) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Legally Erred In Rejecting The Appellant'Sspecificsubmissionand The Unavoidable Circumstances Under Which The Payment Wasmade. Ground No. 3 (I) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Wrongly, Illegally & Arbitrarily Confirmed An Addition Of Rs. 1,11,038/- Made By The Assessing Officer By Disallowing The Claim Of Interest Paid Holding The Same To Be Not Allowable U/S 57(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act.”

establish and the creditor has confirmed the loan, addition was not justify. Reliance is placed on following cases: DCIT V/s Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Gujrat) CIT V/s HeeralalChaganlal 257 ITR 281 (Rajasthan) NemichandKothar V/s CIT 264 ITR 254 (Gawhati)" 6. The Ld. DR placed reliance on the impugned order. 7. Heard. It is undisputed fact that the assessee

MAHIM PATRAN P. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT -2, AGRA

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

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

permanent addresses, amount given to them, name of work entrusted to them, nature of such work and statements recorded by the AO, etc. These details reveal that during the course of examination under s. 131, no question was put to many of these sub- contractors as to the variation in their signatures. Similarly, no question was put to them

SHRI SHYAM SUNDER GAUTAM,MATHURA vs. ITO 3(4), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

established that the entire deposits made in the bank account were either from sale proceeds of agricultural land, or from the agricultural income earned, and the deposits in the bank account were fully explained within the meaning of section 69 of the I.T. Act. I.T.A No. 295/Agra/2016 4 7. The ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report, which