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)

256 ITR 1(Delhi). She also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala – [2000] 245 ITR 360(SC) and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Limited– [2019] 104 taxmann.com 25(SC). 19. I noted that the case law cited by the learned CIT-DR of Spacewood

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

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

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

256 ITR 360.\n(GUJ HC) on the issue\nNo substantial question\nof law can be raised,\nwhere\nsufficient\ndocument have been\nprovided by the\nassessee to prove the\ncash credits u/s 68.\nCIT v Rohini Builders\n254 ITR 275(SC) no\naddition can be made\nby the AO, just taking\non fact the explanation\nfound\nwas\nnot\ncreditworthiness