Search: disallowance

DIXIT RICE MILL ,AURAIYA vs. DCIT, BENGALURU

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

ITA 373/AGR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra10 Jan 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(1)Section 246Section 246ASection 36

disallowed under section 36. 6. It is seen that in the various grounds taken by the assessee he is trying to argue case by filing evidences as is done during scrutiny assessments and not u/s143(1) under centralized computerized processing. In view of the procedures that exist for computerized processing, assessee is advised to first file a rectification application online

SHASHANK TRIPATHI,BHIND vs. ITO, GWALIOR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 99/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 144Section 69C

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We, accordingly, proceed ex parte against the assessee. 3. This assessee’s appeal raises following substantive grounds : “1 That under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(Appeals), NFAC (National

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 70/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

144. (o) “Muninaga Reddy” (supra). (p) “Jaysons Infrastructure India P. Ltd. vs. ITO”, ITA No. (q) 997/Bang/2015. “CIT vs. Smt. Kaushalya Devi”, 216 ITR 660 (Bom). (r) 10. We have heard the parties and have perused the material on record. The issue is as to whether, as contended by the assessee, issuance of a notice under section

SH. SACHIN ARORA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O.-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 118/AGR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

144. (o) “Muninaga Reddy” (supra). (p) “Jaysons Infrastructure India P. Ltd. vs. ITO”, ITA No. (q) 997/Bang/2015. “CIT vs. Smt. Kaushalya Devi”, 216 ITR 660 (Bom). (r) 10. We have heard the parties and have perused the material on record. The issue is as to whether, as contended by the assessee, issuance of a notice under section

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

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is partly

ITA 342/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

disallowance on fixed assets. The perusal of the impugned assessment order would reveal that the ld. Assessing Officer while considering the net profit rate of the assessee has given a comparative analysis of the turnover and profits of the appellant for the three assessment years as under: A.Y. Sales (Rs.) GP (Rs) G.P. Rate NP(Rs.) N.P. Rate

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 355/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

disallowance of the exemption claimed under section 11 and 13 of the Act as the activities of the assessee was in the nature of trade, commerce or business in nature. In response to that the assessee filed the reply of 7th August 2013 and in the reply it was mentioned as under. “ Before replying to specific queries, the assessee

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 149/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

disallowance of the exemption claimed under section 11 and 13 of the Act as the activities of the assessee was in the nature of trade, commerce or business in nature. In response to that the assessee filed the reply of 7th August 2013 and in the reply it was mentioned as under. “ Before replying to specific queries, the assessee

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 256/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

disallowance of the exemption claimed under section 11 and 13 of the Act as the activities of the assessee was in the nature of trade, commerce or business in nature. In response to that the assessee filed the reply of 7th August 2013 and in the reply it was mentioned as under. “ Before replying to specific queries, the assessee

M/S GINNI FILAMENTS LTD.,MATHURA vs. A.C.I.T., RANGE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 173/AGR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 234BSection 44A

144 of the Act. But before invoking the provisions of section 145, it was incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to record that the books of account were not correctly maintained and were not complete and also to mention that the method of accounting followed by the assessee was not in accordance with the norm laid down

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. CHITAVALSAH JUTE MILLS LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 99/AGR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Acit, Vs. Chitavalasah Jute Mills Ltd, Range-1, 73-74, 201, Sheetala House, Faridabad Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccc6834D Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 15/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR

Section 144Section 271D

section 43B. Hence, the assessee gets a relief of Rs 13,90,285. 10.8 Ground No 4: That the A.O. was wrong in disallowing depreciation of Rs.6784622 /- stating non- verification while the case was completed u/s 144

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 201/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

section 56 of the Income Tax Act, hence AO is correct in law in treating it as "Income from other sources." This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee argued before us at length with the support of detailed paper book and synopsis which are placed on record. He submitted that the judgement relied

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 200/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

section 56 of the Income Tax Act, hence AO is correct in law in treating it as "Income from other sources." This ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee argued before us at length with the support of detailed paper book and synopsis which are placed on record. He submitted that the judgement relied

JVH TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 2(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 395/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshjvh Technologies Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, Shop No. A28, V. S. Ward-2(1)(1), Plaza, Sector-3A, Avas Agra Vikas Colony, Sikandra, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcj3746N Assessee By : Shri Rohit Dua, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Dua, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 40A(3)

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 22.05.2023 by the Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, the Learned AR before me stated that Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is not pressed as the Learned AO pursuant to the setting aside

KUSHAL VARSHNEY,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

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

ITA 222/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra06 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Kushal Varshney, Vs. Ito, 1/83, Naurangabad, Aligarh Ward-4(1)(3), Up 202001 Aligarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aevpv0578H Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 06/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/02/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR

Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 68

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 24.12.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-4(1)(3), Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal before us:- Grounds of Appeal “1. Because the Ld. CIT(Appeal) has erred both on facts

SMT ARCHANA DUTTA,MATHURA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 330/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Archana Dutta, Prop. M/S Vs..Acit,Circle-3, Dutta & Dutta Construction, Co., Mathura. 77E Dutta & Dutta Construction, Govind Nagar, Mathura. Panno.Afxpd7557B (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 43BSection 44ASection 68

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/- on account of unexplained capital introduction and addition of Rs. 9,157/- under section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Apropos Ground Nos. 1 to 3, the AO has made this addition, observing as the following:- “The assessee created as situation where by the assessment u/s 144

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

ITA 86/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

disallow the additions proposed by the Assessing Officer. 21. I note the above observations of learned Accountant Member and is of the view that assessment proceedings or any proceedings under the Act before the Assessing Officer which affect the levy of tax on the subject are judicial in nature. It is well-settled that the Assessing Officer upon whom jurisdiction

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

ITA 87/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

disallow the additions proposed by the Assessing Officer. 21. I note the above observations of learned Accountant Member and is of the view that assessment proceedings or any proceedings under the Act before the Assessing Officer which affect the levy of tax on the subject are judicial in nature. It is well-settled that the Assessing Officer upon whom jurisdiction

RAJVEER SINGH YADAV CONTRACTOR,ETAWAH vs. ITO-2(2)(5), , ETAWAH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 179/AGR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra27 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234B

section 144 of the Act and sustaining the addition made therein was I.T.A No. 179/Agra/2018 2 highly unjustified in discarding the past history of the 'appellant'. 2. BECAUSE, while doing so the Ld 'CIT(A)' erred in law in confirming ad-hoc disallowance

AMBRISH SARIN,AGRA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 372/AGR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

section 144 and is therefore not justified. In support, he relies on the following case laws. a) ACIT vs. D. M. Brothers (2010) 44 DTR 0013 (All) b) CIT vs. Target Construction Co. Ltd. (2015) 55 taxmann.com 294 (All) c) Pragati Engineering Corporation vs. ITO (Order dated 5.04.2013 passed by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ITA No. 11/2012

M/S NAVADA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,AGRA vs. ITO 4(3), AGRA

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

ITA 296/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 12A

Disallowance of Rs, 19,90,604/- on account of sundry creditors. The A.O. has made addition Rs.19,90,604/- on the ground that the assessee has not furnished copy of account of sundry creditors and complete address and confirmation. Your honours kind attention is drawn to the written submissions made before the A.O. vide letter dated 03.02.2014 (copy enclosed) whereby