SURESH CHAND GUPTA,JHANSI vs. DCIT-6, JHANSI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

business income to give benefit of double taxation is not supported by a logical or cogent explanation. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly upheld the interest income from FDRs as other income of the assessee in the reassessment

SUBHASH CHANDRA GUPTA,MAINPURI vs. ITO WARD-2(5), MAINPURI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.216/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Subhash Chandra Gupta Ito-2(5) बनाम/ Kharagjeet Nagar, Mainpuri Mainpuri Vs. Up 205001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adjpc-7010-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Kulshreshtha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

income filed during reassessment proceedings. The assessee was required to prove business activities and the assessee filed affidavit on 16-10-2018 in support

SMT. VIDHYA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. I.T.O., WARD-4(4), AGRA

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

reassess the income of the assessee. However, in the present appeals, there is nothing on records to show that the respective A.O.s had applied their minds to form the requisite satisfaction after receipt of Report from ITO 4(1), Agra. Even the particulars of already filed Returns of Income are not mentioned in any of the reasons recorded

PUSHPA,MATHURA vs. ITO-1(2)(3), MATHURA

In the result,both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenashri. Pushpendra Singh. Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(2)(3), M-22, Phase-I, Mahavidhya Colony. Agra. Mathura. Pan: Dldps6755P (Appellant) (Respondent) Smt. Pushpa Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(2)(3), M-22, Phase-I, Mahavidhya Colony. Agra. Mathura. Pan: Bcopd0484L (Appellant) (Respondent)

business of manufacturing of yarn and knitted fabrics from its industrial undertaking situate in District Mathura. The petitioner claims that it is a 100% Export Oriented Unit,(the EOU) and its income is exempt under section 10 B of the Act. For the relevant assessment years, the assessments were completed under section 143(1). Along with the Income Tax Return

SH. YUGAL KISHOR AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(3)(1), ETAH

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

reassessment order u/s 147 read with Section 143(3) dated 24.10.2019, the Assessing Officer made two additions – firstly, disallowance of Rs.12,15,413/- claimed by the assessee as expenditure against income from other sources by invoking provision of Section 57(iii) of the Act as the assessee could not furnish any evidences in respect of these expenses , and secondly disallowance

TEJ SINGH,MATHURA vs. ITO 1(3)(4), MATHURA

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

business transaction and thus amenable of being charged as ‘capital gains’. 7. Because, without prejudice to the above, learned ‘CTT (Appeals)’ erred in not quantifying, the amount of income chargeable as ‘capital gains’ and remitting the matter to the file of ‘AO’ for verification of genuineness of purchase deed ignoring the fact that the purchase deed had been submitted

LAKSHYA ICE & COLD STORAGE P LTD,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(5), ALIGARH

In the result, by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Lakshya Ice & Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Vs.. Income Tax Officer, Goyal Bhawan, Opp. Maheshwari Inter Ward 1(5), Aligarh College, Sasni Gate, Bye Pass Road, Aligarh (Pan: Aabcl5656R) (Respondent) (Appellant)

business but e-filed its Income-tax return on 09/09/2010 declaring NIL income for the year under appeal; that the AO has issued notice dated 16/09/2013 u/s 148 of the Act based on the information received from DGIT(Inv)-II, New Delhi, related to the search case of Shri Surendra Kumar Jain Group (entry operator); that according to the reasons

YOGENDRA SHARMA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ETAH

In the result, the appeal preferred by assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13 Yogendra Sharma, I-4695, 2Nd Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Floor, Gali No. 4-B, Balbir Nagar Ward 3(2), Etah. Extension, Shahdara, Delhi. Pan :Cgkps6492J (Appellant) (Respondent)

business receipts. Accordingly, he added the difference of Rs.3,07,400/- to the total income of the assessee. Further, he determined the short term capital gains of Rs.2,32,800/- and observed that the capital gain declared by the assessee in his ITR is not substantiated by any evidence and there is contradiction to the stamp duty value

PREMWATI SUMAN,AGRA vs. ITO-1(3), AGRA

In the result both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Premwati Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnvps9819N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri. Ranjeet Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnlps9622P (Appellant) (Respondent)

business; all that is to be examined is whether the fact of the deposits, per se, in the bank account of the assessee could be basis of holding the view (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) that the income has escaped assessment. The answer, in our humble understanding, is in negative. The Assessing Officer has opined that an income

SHAHID UMAR,ETAH vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshshahid Umar, Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3)(3), Village Mohanpura, Kasganj, Up Kasganj, Etah, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abwpu0607Q Assessee By : Shri S. K. Goyal, Adv Shri Tarang Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

income was filed by the assessee in response to notice issued under section 148 of the Act on 26-3- 2022. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee was given several notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated 17.10.22, 16.11.2022, 06.12.2022 and show-cause notice on 27.02.2023. In response to the show-cause notice dated

SARVESH DEVI (LEGAL HEIR OF LATE MADAN LAL TOMAR),AGRA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sarvesh Devi (Legal Heir Vs. Income Tax Officer, Of Late Madan Lal Tomar), Ward-4(3)(1), 51, Keshavkunj Pratap Hathras Nagar, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Eshpd4540M Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/11/2025

reassessment framed u/s 144/ 147 of the Act on 30.01.2015. 4. The ld AR before us challenged the validity of framing of assessment in the name of deceased by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd reported in 416 ITR 613 wherein it was observed

CHANDRA PRAKASH GOPLANI,BENGALURU vs. ITO 2(1)(1), AGRA

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

business receipts declared in the return of income filed with the Revenue and has suffered taxation. These plea and contentions of the assessee requires investigation of facts and enquiry/verifications. Both the authorities below has passed an ex-parte order in the absence of the assessee. Now, the assessee has come forward and the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE RANGE CENTRAL, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE AGRA, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, RANGE CIRCLE, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, RANGE CENTRAL, AGRA

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.141/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.142/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.143/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.144/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.145/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.146/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2019-20) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.147/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.148/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.149/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) & 10. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.150/Agr/2023

business income’ and finalized the assessment. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee raised various arguments to assail the impugned addition. It was stated that the assessee recognized revenue on the sale of project by following percentage completion of method of accounting which is recognized method of revenue recognition. It was contended that no incriminating documents was found from the possession