SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, , GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

disallowing expenditure u/s. 11 & 12 ofthe Act is upheld particularly because of the fact that as per section 119(2)(b) of theAct the CIT(A) is not authorized to admit application or claim of exemption which saysthat “ the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoidinggenuine hardship in any case or class

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

disallowing expenditure u/s. 11 & 12 ofthe Act is upheld particularly because of the fact that as per section 119(2)(b) of theAct the CIT(A) is not authorized to admit application or claim of exemption which saysthat “ the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoidinggenuine hardship in any case or class

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

disallowing expenditure u/s. 11 & 12 ofthe Act is upheld particularly because of the fact that as per section 119(2)(b) of theAct the CIT(A) is not authorized to admit application or claim of exemption which saysthat “ the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoidinggenuine hardship in any case or class

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

disallow such claim for deduction. Similarly, vide Finance Act, 2008, w.e.f. 1.4.2008 sub- Section (6) has been inserted in Section 195 which requires the payer to furnish information relating to payment of any sum in such form and manner as may be prescribed by the Board. This provision is brought into force only from 1.4.2008. It will not apply

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

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

disallowance of purchases made by the assessee.\n3. We have heard the Id DR and perused the materials available on record. The return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 was filed by the Assessee declaring total income of Rs 8,68,68,625/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Id AO proceeded to examine the veracity

PEHAL,CHHATARPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

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

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member)

disallowed. Assessee did not comply with the notice(s), which led to denial of deduction u/s. 11 of the Act by the Assessing Officer to the tune of Rs.5,83,244/- claimed by the assessee vide re-assessment order dated 27.03.2015 framed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 144/147 of the 1961 Act. 5. Assessee filed first appeal with

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)

disallowance of interest paid to related parties by applying the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. ITA Nos. 273 & 274/AGR/2024 Alnoor Exports 10

BUNDELKHAND GRAMOTTHAN EVAM SHAIKCHHIK VIKAS SAMITI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD EXEMPTION, AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2021-22

disallowing the amount based on Form-10B. 4. Aggrieved, assessee filed a rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act and the same was denied. 5. It was brought to my notice that while certifying the Form-10B, the auditor of assessee has, by mistake, filled column -3 row 3 as zero instead of Rs.14,84,424/-. He brought

ABC PAPER PRODUCTS,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(1) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowed the claim for reason that no notification\nwas issued by the Central Government in terms of section 105(3) of the Act. Therefore, only\nissue remained for our consideration is whether any notification as provided in section\n105(3) is issued by the Central Government to this effect or not.\n16.3. Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 provides

SHRI BALWANT SINGH PUBLIC SCHOOL SAMITI,HATHRAS vs. ITO WARD 4(3)(4), HATHRAS, HATHRAS

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhshri Balwant Singh Vs. Ito, Public School Samiti, Ward-4(2)(4), Sikandra Rao Road, Hathras Salempur, Sasni, Hathras, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaajs4970P Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Garh, Adv Revenue By: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2026

10(23C)(vi). Hence the disallowance is not agreed. The assessee is not required to file Form 10AC as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 6. Thereafter, intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act dated 21-03-2023 was issued accepting the declared nil income. Subsequently, the Learned CPC suo moto without issuing any notice

SATISH PRAKASH AGARWAL,AGRA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC erred in restricting the deduction of interest expense only to the extent of interest income thereby maintaining the disallowance on account of interest expense to the extent of Rs. 20,46,265/- out of the total disallowance

HYDRISE FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

10. Coming to the fact that the Assessing Officer while sending draft assessment orders has not enclosed any assessment folder, assessment material, search material seized from the assessee‟s premises and other related material including the replies filed by the assessee qua the additions made by the Assessing Officer. It is noted that the Assessing Officer has made additions

HYDRISE FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

10. Coming to the fact that the Assessing Officer while sending draft assessment orders has not enclosed any assessment folder, assessment material, search material seized from the assessee‟s premises and other related material including the replies filed by the assessee qua the additions made by the Assessing Officer. It is noted that the Assessing Officer has made additions

TOMAR AND BROTHERS,ETAWAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(5), ETAWAH

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

10% made by the 'AO' inrespect of 'Purchase of Material', Labour Expenses, Repair & Maintenance and Establishment, Selling and Administrative Expenses. 2.) BECAUSE, while doing so the Ld. CIT(A) omitted to consider that after sustaining disallowance @ 7.5% the resultant profit works out to 11.8% which is highly excessive in the business of civil construction and in view of the past

NEETA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(1)(2), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Neeta Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-23, New Agra, Agra Ward-2(1)(2), Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpa0936E Assessee By : Shri Amit Goyal, Adv Shri Nitin Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

disallowance of exemption of Rs. 95,20,372 being the long term capital gain arising on transfer of shares Capital Trade Link Ltd. Under section 10(38) of I.T.Act, 1961. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in enhancing the income

M/S SATYAM SOLUTIONS LTD,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT1(1), , GWALIOR

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

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

disallowance of employees’ contribution towards Provident Fund (PF) and Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) was covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC). Subsequently, the assessee filed an application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking recall of the said order dated

MONIKA RATHORE,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2023-24

10,95,293/- was claimed u/s. 90 of the Act as tax relief, as the total global income was declared by the assessee in return of income filed in India with Revenue. There was tax deducted on dividend earned from USA to the tune of Rs.604/- apart from tax deducted by Google Germany on salary earned in Germany from

KANHA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GWALIOR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

section 2(15) of the Act and not for the purposes of profit. The aggregate receipts of the assessee society for the year under consideration do not exceed Rs. one crore. Assessee filed ITR-7 along with Form-10B for A.Y. 2018-19 on 09.10.2018, declaring nil income. CPC, Bangalore, vide, communication dated 04.12.2019, intimated the appellant assessee