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

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

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

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

section 115BBE of the Act and completed the assessment. This action was upheld by the Learned CITA. Even before us, no evidence was produced by the assessee to justify the addition to justify the source of additions to the capital account in the sum of Rs 3,46,110/-. Hence, we do not deem it fit to interfere

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

disallowed, since the sales were\nmade by the appellant, not doubted and the appellant has\nalso produced the production details of frozen meat in\nquantity.\nii).\nThe suppliers are regular tax payers and they have filed\ntheir ITRs and computation of Income.\niii).\nThe purchase invoices clearly mention the detail of 'Raw\nBoneless Meat'.\niv).\nAll the payments/ for purchases

SH SANJAY BANSAL ,MORENA vs. A.C.I.T (CENTRAL), GWALIOR

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

Bench: learned CIT(Appeals) who has very exhaustively passed the impugned order in 60 pages and considered all the submissions of the assessee in the tabulated form and otherwise, which need not to be repeated again for the sake of brevity. However, learned CIT(Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal confirming the addition only to the extent of Rs.71,44,045/- as against addition of Rs.91,06,669/-. 4. Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds : "1.Because in any view, th

section 143(3) of the LT. Act as confirmed by CIT (A) vide Order dt. 21.02.2022 confirming the impugned addition of Rs 71,44,045/-made on merely assumptions, presumptions, surmises & conjectures is wrong, illegal and bad in law. 3.1 Because in any view, the impugned addition as confirmed

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

section 145(3) of the Act, estimated the profit based on comparative profit shown by other players in the similar line, which is usually in the range of 0.8% to 1.25%. He observed that considering the totality of fact and circumstances of the case, net profit rate of 1% is found to be reasonable. He, therefore, estimated income

BLUE LOTUS DEVELOPERS,GWALIOR vs. DCIT 1(1) GWALIOR, GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshblue Lotus Developers, Vs. Dcit, 101, The Empire 33 City Circle-1(1), Centre, Thalipur, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaifb4692D Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

disallowance of expenses in the total sum of Rs 6,50,000/- without rejecting the books of accounts of the Assessee under section 145(3

SH. SHOBHA RAM SHARMA,MATHURA vs. DCIT.-3, MATHURA

Appeal is partly allowed in very terms

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961\n(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').\n2.\nIt emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned\nauthorities have, more particularly, the Assessing Officer's\nassessment dated 26.12.2016; disallowed/added an aggregate\namount of Rs.25,18,014/-; involving the alleged miscellaneous\nexpenses of Rs.50,000/-, repair and maintenances expenses

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

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

50,00,460/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2012-13 153A Rs.4,38,939/- Rs.2,30,94,073/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2013-14 153A Rs.10,18,269/- Rs.1,09,03,269/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2014-15 153A Rs.5,84,183/- Rs.3,09,11,700/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2015-16 143(3) Rs.10,04,820/- Rs.2

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)

50,00,460/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2012-13 153A Rs.4,38,939/- Rs.2,30,94,073/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2013-14 153A Rs.10,18,269/- Rs.1,09,03,269/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2014-15 153A Rs.5,84,183/- Rs.3,09,11,700/- Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary AASPK9267B 2015-16 143(3) Rs.10,04,820/- Rs.2

SURBHI ANAND,SOUTH DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2023-24] Surbhi Anand, Acit, C-155, Basement, Lajpat Circle-1(1)(1), Nagar-2, South Delhi, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Sanjay Place, Delhi-110024 Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282002 Pan-Acypa6580B Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, Ca Respondent By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 Order, Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am

disallowed the claim of the TDS credit of Rs. 24,04,000 reflected in Form 26AS for the impugned year resulting in appellant filing an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and also an online rectification under section 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7 Surbhi Anand The Id. CIT(A) passed the impugned order without issue of any notice

GRAM VIKAS KALYAN SANSTHAN,MATHURA vs. I.T.O. (TDS), AGRA

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhgram Vikas Kalyan Sansthan, Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), Nagla Aklha, Sonkh – Goverdhan Road, Agra. Mathura – 281 123 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aaatg3272E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shalenndra Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 Date Of Order : 28.10.2025

50,231/-for not deducting TDS under section 194C is hereby confirm., which is arbitrary, uncalled for, unjustified and based on surmises and conjunctures. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is bad in law and not in consonance with the facts of the case. 3

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

3) The amount of under-reported income shall be,— (i) in a case where income has been assessed for the first time,— (a) if return has been furnished, the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143; (b) in a case where no return

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

3) The amount of under-reported income shall be,— (i) in a case where income has been assessed for the first time,— (a) if return has been furnished, the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143; (b) in a case where no return

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

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

3)(1),\nJhansi\n(Respondent)\nShri Anurag Sinha, Adv\nShri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR\n20/11/2025\n26/11/2025\nORDER\nThe appeals in ITA Nos. 367, 388, 368, 389, 369, 390 & 391 /AGR/2025\nfor AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18, arise out of the order of the National Faceless\nAppeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'Id. NFAC)', in short]\nagainst

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

disallowed, since the sales were\nmade by the appellant, not doubted and the appellant has\nalso produced the production details of frozen meat in\nquantity.\nii).\nThe suppliers are regular tax payers and they have filed\ntheir ITRs and computation of Income.\niii).\nThe purchase invoices clearly mention the detail of 'Raw\nBoneless Meat'.\niv). All the payments/ for purchases

SHRI VINAY CHAURASIA,CHHATARPUR vs. P. CIT, GWALIOR

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

disallowing expenses. The Pr. CIT invoked revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263, alleging the AO failed to examine credit entries of Rs. 50 Lacs and the differential interest income, and also failed to consider Section 2(22)(e) regarding a loan taken by the assessee.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the issues of differential interest income and Section

AJAY BHATIA,KANPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER 2(2)(5) ETAWAH, ETAWAH

Appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

3. It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have taken recourse to section 154 rectification for the purposes of disallowing the assessee’s revenue expenditure representing interest and remuneration payments etc. amounting to Rs.1,56,552/-; as not allowable under section 37(1) of the Act, in the Assessing Officer’s order dated 23rd

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

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

3)(1),\nJhansi\n(Respondent)\nShri Anurag Sinha, Adv\nShri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR\n20/11/2025\n26/11/2025\nORDER\n1. The appeals in ITA Nos. 367, 388, 368, 389, 369, 390 & 391 /AGR/2025\nfor AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18, arise out of the order of the National Faceless\nAppeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'Id. NFAC)', in short]\nagainst