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

6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under section 12AA of the Act vide Certificate dated 15.10.2018 by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) Bhopal in view thereof the Ld. 'CIT(A)' ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed for A.Y 2006-07 in appellate proceedings in view of revised proviso to sub-section (2) of section 12A w.e.f

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

6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under section 12AA of the Act vide Certificate dated 15.10.2018 by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) Bhopal in view thereof the Ld. 'CIT(A)' ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed for A.Y 2006-07 in appellate proceedings in view of revised proviso to sub-section (2) of section 12A w.e.f

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

6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under section 12AA of the Act vide Certificate dated 15.10.2018 by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) Bhopal in view thereof the Ld. 'CIT(A)' ought to have allowed exemption under section 11 as claimed for A.Y 2006-07 in appellate proceedings in view of revised proviso to sub-section (2) of section 12A w.e.f

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

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

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

6 raised by the revenue is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication.\n14. In the result, the appeal of the revenue for Assessment Year 2015-16 is dismissed.\nITA No 274/AGR/2024 – Assessment Year 2018-19 Revenue\nAppeal\n15. The Ground Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the revenue are challenging the deletion of disallowance of expenditure

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)

6 raised by the revenue is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 14. In the result, the appeal of the revenue for Assessment Year 2015-16 is dismissed. ITA No 274/AGR/2024 – Assessment Year 2018-19 – Revenue Appeal 15. The Ground Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the revenue are challenging the deletion of disallowance of expenditure

PEHAL,CHHATARPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

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

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member)

disallowing exemption u/s.11 of the Act and therefore, grounds Nos. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 taken by the appellant are summarily dismissed. That appellant's first appeal's all the seven grounds are still taken as grounds of appeal here in this appeal before the Hon'ble Bench may kindly be heard during the course of hearing

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

6) or sub-section (7), where under- reported income is in consequence of any misreporting thereof by any person, the penalty 7 | P a g e ITA No.95& 96/Agr/2023 referred to in sub-section (1) shall be equal to two hundred per cent of the amount of tax payable on under-reported income. (9) The cases of misreporting of income

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

6) or sub-section (7), where under- reported income is in consequence of any misreporting thereof by any person, the penalty 7 | P a g e ITA No.95& 96/Agr/2023 referred to in sub-section (1) shall be equal to two hundred per cent of the amount of tax payable on under-reported income. (9) The cases of misreporting of income

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

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

HARI OM AGARWAL,KOLARAS vs. ITO SHIVPURI, ASHOK NAGAR

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

disallowed expenses on 9 | P a g e presumption, assumptions and conjectures without pointing out specific item of expenditure which is not incurred for the business purposes. Ld. CIT(Appeals) while adjudicating first appeal has dismissed appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-submission of replies. Ld. CIT(Appeals), no doubt, has issued as many as six notices

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2019-20 is\nallowed and appeals filed by the Revenue in AYs 2021-22, 2022-23 and\n2023-24 are dismissed

11,24,560/- and the CIT(A) in the case of the Md. Irfan had wrote\nan email to the DCIT, Central Circle – AGRA on 08.11.2023 case of\n\"Sir,\nM/s. HMA Agro Industries Limited and the response to the said email\nis as under:\nPlease refer to the subject as mentioned above.\nWith respect to the same, the desired

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

section 40(b) of the 'Act'.” 3. Briefly stated, in the absence of proper books of account maintained by the assessee, which were found to be incomplete without supporting details, stock register, ledger, cash book etc., the Assessing Officer disallowed 10% of the expenses incurred by the assessee on purchase of material, labour expenses, repair and maintenance, establishment, selling

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

SNEHA PANDEY,ETAWAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(2)(5) ETAWAH, ETAWAH

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

section 250(6) of the Act.\n5. Perused the records and heard learned representative for the\nassessee and Id. departmental representative for the revenue.\n6. Learned AR has submitted that the impugned order of Id.\nCIT(Appeals) is not sustainable, having been passed without affording\nreasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.\n7.\nLd. DR, on the other hand

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)

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 of penalty under section 270A of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant