PRAMOD KUMAR DUBEY,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,1(3), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

6). The absence of any such restriction shows that rebate under section 87A is available even where the total income includes short-term capital gains taxable under section 111A, provided the total income does not exceed Rs.7 lakhs. 4.4 The AR further submitted that the Finance Bill 2025 proposes to amend section 87A to deny rebate on all incomes taxable

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

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

6) of Section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 8. That the AO has erred on facts and in law while making the addition by disallowing

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

section 263 of the Act. He remitted the order back to the AO\nto pass fresh order after conducting proper enquiries.\n9.\nOn careful consideration of material facts on record, we observed that Ld\nPCIT had completely ignored the other facts on record that in the case of\nIrfan, in subsequent appeal before CIT(A), the addition was deleted. Further

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

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AGRA, SANJAY PLACE vs. MAMTA AGARWAL, BHAGWATI INTERNATIONAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

6) of the Act stood served on him but the party are chosen not to respond for which the assessee cannot be faulted. The Id NFAC took due cognizance of the fact that the assessee had submitted the computation of income along with copy of ITR, audited financial statement, copy of VAT duly declaring the entire purchase and sums including

KOTHIWAL ICE AND COLD STORAGE .P.LTD,ETAH vs. NFAC , NEW DELHI

Appeals is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vs. Nfac, Kothiwal Ice & Storage Pvt. Ltd., Delhi Sadabad Road, Jaleshar, Etah, Uttar Pradesh Pan :Aacck1353P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2025 Order

section 40A(3) disallowance in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 6. This assessee’s appeals is allowed. Order pronounced in the open

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

6% on Turnover and allow deductions under 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

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

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

ANKITA PALIWAL,ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALIGARH

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19

6. There is no condition prescribed in DTAA that the FTC can be disallowed for non- compliance of any procedural provision. As the provisions of DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act, the assessee has vested right to claim the FTC under the tax treaty, and the same cannot be disallowed for mere delay in compliance of a procedural provision

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

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

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

RAM KUMAR SHIVHARE,SHIVPURI vs. DCIT ACIT 3(1) GWALIOR, GWALOR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. Dcit/Acit-3(1), Sh. Ram Kumar Shivhare, Wonder Bike Auto Sales Gwaliar Shivpuri, Ab Road, Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh Pan :Adkps8008H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Adv. Department By Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2025 Order

section 68/69 of the Act once not credited or invested in the relevant previous year. We thus see no merit in the impugned former additions of Rs.7,13,000/- which stands deleted in very terms. The assessee’s succeeds in his instant former twin substantive grounds. 4. Next comes the estimated disallowance of assessee’s various heads of expenditure, totaling