MS/ BHOLE BABA MILK FOOD INDUSTRIES,AGRA vs. THE A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

d) No. 6465/2000 (SC). “CIT vs. Zoom Communications Pvt. Ltd.”, ITA (e) No.07/2010(Del) (H.C.). “ShyamBiri Works”, 259 ITR 625 (All. H.C.). (f) “Sangam Enterprises vs. CIT”, 288 ITR 396 (All). (g) “Harish Hosiery Mart”, ITAT, Ahmedabad. (h) “Arcotech”, (Del) (H.C.). (i) “B.A. Balasubramanian & Bros.”, 20 Taxman 215 (j) (Mad). “Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs. (k) DCIT” ITA No.6617/Mum/2014

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD,JHANSI vs. DCIT -2(3)(1), JHANSI

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

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

d) No. 6465/2000 (SC). “CIT vs. Zoom Communications Pvt. Ltd.”, ITA (e) No.07/2010(Del) (H.C.). “Shyam Biri Works”, 259 ITR 625 (All. H.C.). (f) “Sangam Enterprises vs. CIT”, 288 ITR 396 (All). (g) “Harish Hosiery Mart”, ITAT, Ahmedabad. (h) “Arcotech”, (Del) (H.C.). (i) “B.A. Balasubramanian & Bros.”, 20 Taxman 215 (j) (Mad). “Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation vs. (k) DCIT” ITA No.6617/Mum/2014

DIXIT RICE MILL ,AURAIYA vs. DCIT, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

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

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)

D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA Nos. 06, 07 & 08/AGR/2023 for AYs 2012-13, 2017- 18 & 2018-19, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. NFAC‟, in short] dated 22.11.2022 against the order of assessment passed u/s 271(1

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)

D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA Nos. 06, 07 & 08/AGR/2023 for AYs 2012-13, 2017- 18 & 2018-19, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. NFAC‟, in short] dated 22.11.2022 against the order of assessment passed u/s 271(1

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)

D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA Nos. 06, 07 & 08/AGR/2023 for AYs 2012-13, 2017- 18 & 2018-19, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. NFAC‟, in short] dated 22.11.2022 against the order of assessment passed u/s 271(1

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SUNIL KUMAR MITTAL & MAMTA MITTAL, MORENA

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

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

d AAAAM5816B (iii) Manoj Kumar 1. Manoj Kumar EWS 44-45, Indra Saxena & Saxena Puram, Samshabad Sharmila 2. Sharmila Road, Agra Agrawal Agrawal AAAAV2973J (iv) Vandana Jain 1. Vandana Jain 170 Jiwaji Ganj, & Rama Bansal 2. Rama Bansal Morena (v) AABAS8327E Sunil Kumar 1. Sunil Kumar Mittal Kadam Singh, &Mamta Mittal 2. Mamta Mittal Kansana Marg, Duttapura, Morena AAAAR3588D

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S RAKESH SHIVHARE & NISHA MITTAL, MORENA

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

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

d AAAAM5816B (iii) Manoj Kumar 1. Manoj Kumar EWS 44-45, Indra Saxena & Saxena Puram, Samshabad Sharmila 2. Sharmila Road, Agra Agrawal Agrawal AAAAV2973J (iv) Vandana Jain 1. Vandana Jain 170 Jiwaji Ganj, & Rama Bansal 2. Rama Bansal Morena (v) AABAS8327E Sunil Kumar 1. Sunil Kumar Mittal Kadam Singh, &Mamta Mittal 2. Mamta Mittal Kansana Marg, Duttapura, Morena AAAAR3588D

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SHYAM SUNDER & MANISH TAORI, MORENA

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

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

d AAAAM5816B (iii) Manoj Kumar 1. Manoj Kumar EWS 44-45, Indra Saxena & Saxena Puram, Samshabad Sharmila 2. Sharmila Road, Agra Agrawal Agrawal AAAAV2973J (iv) Vandana Jain 1. Vandana Jain 170 Jiwaji Ganj, & Rama Bansal 2. Rama Bansal Morena (v) AABAS8327E Sunil Kumar 1. Sunil Kumar Mittal Kadam Singh, &Mamta Mittal 2. Mamta Mittal Kansana Marg, Duttapura, Morena AAAAR3588D

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S VANDANA JAIN & RAMA BANSAL, MORENA

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

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

d AAAAM5816B (iii) Manoj Kumar 1. Manoj Kumar EWS 44-45, Indra Saxena & Saxena Puram, Samshabad Sharmila 2. Sharmila Road, Agra Agrawal Agrawal AAAAV2973J (iv) Vandana Jain 1. Vandana Jain 170 Jiwaji Ganj, & Rama Bansal 2. Rama Bansal Morena (v) AABAS8327E Sunil Kumar 1. Sunil Kumar Mittal Kadam Singh, &Mamta Mittal 2. Mamta Mittal Kansana Marg, Duttapura, Morena AAAAR3588D

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2,, AGRA vs. M/S SAKSHI TAIRI & CHHAYA BATTAD, MORENA

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

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

d AAAAM5816B (iii) Manoj Kumar 1. Manoj Kumar EWS 44-45, Indra Saxena & Saxena Puram, Samshabad Sharmila 2. Sharmila Road, Agra Agrawal Agrawal AAAAV2973J (iv) Vandana Jain 1. Vandana Jain 170 Jiwaji Ganj, & Rama Bansal 2. Rama Bansal Morena (v) AABAS8327E Sunil Kumar 1. Sunil Kumar Mittal Kadam Singh, &Mamta Mittal 2. Mamta Mittal Kansana Marg, Duttapura, Morena AAAAR3588D

SH. MANOJ AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. I.T.O.-2(2), GWALIOR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is required to be failed and accordingly we dismiss both the appeals

271(1)(b) were also issued to the assessee. 4. Thereafter, a Notice under section 142(1) along with a detailed Questionnaire was issued to the assessee fixing compliance on 28.11.2011. In response to Assessee along with his Chartered Accountant appeared before the AO on 12.12.2011, filed written reply along with Audit Report offering a sum of Rs14

K P ENTERPRISES,ETAWAH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated10.06.2025 for Assessment Year2014-15 affirming the penalty order dated 15.02.2022 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income

M/S MISS HILL EDUCATION SOCIETY,GWALIOR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No. 90/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2003-04) M/s Miss Hill Education Society Vs..ACIT-Circle-1, Laxmi Bai Colony Padav Lashkar Gwalior. Gwalior. PAN No.AAATM8693D (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri Ajay Wadjikar, AR. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing 31.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement 27.09.2017 ORDER This is assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year

SMT. GARIMA MEHTA,GWALIOR vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(2), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

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

D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10, taking the following grounds: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law and in any view of the matter, the authorities below have erred in making and upholding the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment in business

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

D E R** - 1. The appeals in ITA Nos. 367, 388, 368, 389, 369, 390 & 391 /AGR/2025 for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18, arise out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'ld. NFAC)', in short] against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B and 271(1

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

D E R** - 1. The appeals in ITA Nos. 367, 388, 368, 389, 369, 390 & 391 /AGR/2025 for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18, arise out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'ld. NFAC)', in short] against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B and 271(1

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

D E R 1. The appeals in ITA Nos. 367, 388, 368, 389, 369, 390 & 391 /AGR/2025 for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18, arise out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC)’, in short] against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B and 271(1