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

4 | P a g e ITA No.219 to 224/Agr/2024 15.10.2018 with effect from 01.04.2013 under section 12AA of the ‘Act’ by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal in pursuance of directions by the Hon’ble ITAT order dated 30.07.2018in view thereof the Ld. ‘CIT(A)’ ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed

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

4 | P a g e ITA No.219 to 224/Agr/2024 15.10.2018 with effect from 01.04.2013 under section 12AA of the ‘Act’ by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal in pursuance of directions by the Hon’ble ITAT order dated 30.07.2018in view thereof the Ld. ‘CIT(A)’ ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed

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

4 | P a g e ITA No.219 to 224/Agr/2024 15.10.2018 with effect from 01.04.2013 under section 12AA of the ‘Act’ by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal in pursuance of directions by the Hon’ble ITAT order dated 30.07.2018in view thereof the Ld. ‘CIT(A)’ ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed

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

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

4 | P a g e 6. The main point for determination under appeal is as to whether learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,53,06,886/-, paid to the foreign commission Agent, ignoring the fact that the assessee was governed by the provisions of section 195 of the Act and not by section

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 Rs 11,000/- ; Rs 11,850/- , the same was paid to several employees towards school fees and tea expenses and there is no violation of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act thereon. 21. With regard to Car running and maintenance expenses, the same represents reimbursements made to partner and employees for petrol and diesel purchased

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

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

disallowance of Rs 11,000/- ; Rs\n11,850/-, the same was paid to several employees towards school fees and\ntea expenses and there is no violation of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act\nthereon.\n21. With regard to Car running and maintenance expenses, the same\nrepresents reimbursements made to partner and employees for petrol and\ndiesel purchased

PEHAL,CHHATARPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

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

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member)

4. That, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law and in any view of the matter, the Ld. Authorities below have erred in invoking and upholding the applicability of provisions of section 11, 12 by ignoring part of section 12A(2) of the Act, in respect of disallowing

LAXMI FOUNDATION,FIROZABAD vs. ITO EXEMPTION AGRA (CPC) , AGRA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

disallowed the assessee’s claim of section 11 exemption; in the course of section 143(1) processing dated 20.03.2020 as upheld in the impugned lower appellate discussion reading as follows : “5. Decision: After carefully going through the facts of the case, intimation order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the material on record, the grounds

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

4. BECAUSE, disallowance of Rs. 9,53,000/- made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect of rent paid for hiring of JCB Porcelain, Roller, Tractor and Tanker is unwarranted, without any evidence brought on records to conclude that any payment was made to any individual in excess of the threshold limit

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

11,24,560/- and the CIT(A) in the case of the Md. Irfan had wrote an email to the DCIT, Central Circle – AGRA on 08.11.2023 case of 15 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. M/s. HMA Agro Industries Limited and the response to the said email is as under: O. From the above findings of the AO given

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

11,24,560/- and the CIT(A) in the case of the Md. Irfan had wrote an email to the DCIT, Central Circle – AGRA on 08.11.2023 case of 15 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. M/s. HMA Agro Industries Limited and the response to the said email is as under: O. From the above findings of the AO given

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

11,24,560/- and the CIT(A) in the case of the Md. Irfan had wrote an email to the DCIT, Central Circle – AGRA on 08.11.2023 case of 15 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. M/s. HMA Agro Industries Limited and the response to the said email is as under: O. From the above findings of the AO given

MR. TASAVVER HUSAIN,FARRUKHABAD vs. ACIT, FARRUKHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance has formed the basis of imposition of penalty in the case of the person for the same or any other assessment year. (12) The penalty referred to in sub-section (1) shall be imposed, by an order in writing, by the Assessing Officer, 97[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner

MR. TASAVVER HUSAIN,FARRUKHABAD vs. ACIT , FARRUKHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance has formed the basis of imposition of penalty in the case of the person for the same or any other assessment year. (12) The penalty referred to in sub-section (1) shall be imposed, by an order in writing, by the Assessing Officer, 97[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) , GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

4 itself, there is no need to separately adjudicate the other grounds raised by the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 7/Ag/2023 – Asst Year 2017-18 - Assessee Appeal 7. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in confirming the levy

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

4 itself, there is no need to separately adjudicate the other grounds raised by the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 7/Ag/2023 – Asst Year 2017-18 - Assessee Appeal 7. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in confirming the levy

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

4 itself, there is no need to separately adjudicate the other grounds raised by the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 7/Ag/2023 – Asst Year 2017-18 - Assessee Appeal 7. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in confirming the levy