JAY SINGH,MORENA vs. ITO-1, MORENA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Jay Singh, Vs. Ito, Gram Khaneta, Maharajpur, Ward-1, Morena, Madhya Pradesh Morena (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Cfwps1529H

reassessment proceedings, notice under section 142(1) of the Act stood issued to the assessee. Assessee, being an uneducated person and having no knowledge of operating the computer and income tax portal could not make compliance to the notices issued by the learned AO, which ultimately culminated in framing of assessment under section 144 read with section

ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DCIT 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Anil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dy. Cit, 44, R. S. Residency, Circle-2(1)(1), Dayal Bagh, Agra, Up Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aampa3335J Assessee By : Shri Rajni Kant Verma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/11/2025

27-03-2018 on the ground, cash deposit represent income escaping assessment of the assessee.The Learned AO on receipt of the AIR information issued notice under Section 133(6) of the Act on 18-01-2018 asking for the source of cash deposits, to the assessee. The assessee enclosed the copy of income tax return together with the computation

NEETA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(1)(2), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Neeta Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-23, New Agra, Agra Ward-2(1)(2), Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpa0936E Assessee By : Shri Amit Goyal, Adv Shri Nitin Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

27-03-2017 declaring total income of Rs. Neeta Agarwal 4,10,340/- and claiming exemption under Section 10(38) of the Act on account of long-term capital gains of Rs. 94,59,175/-. This long-term capital gain which was claimed as exempt, arose on sale of listed company M/s Capital Trade Link Ltd. The learned AO, based

ACIT-CIRCEL-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. MAYANK AGRAWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

reassessment shall be made by an Assessment Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section (1) of Section 153A of the Act or the assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section 153B of the Act except the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner

VISHWAMBHAR DAYAL AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

reassessment shall be made by an Assessment Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section (1) of Section 153A of the Act or the assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section 153B of the Act except the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner

ACIT-CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. PUNEET AGARWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

reassessment shall be made by an Assessment Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section (1) of Section 153A of the Act or the assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section 153B of the Act except the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA vs. SH. VISHWAMBHAR DAYAL AGARWAL, AGRA

reassessment of income of the other person would be in\naccordance with the provisions of section 153A and also relied upon\nthe judgments of \"Supreme Court\" in the case that the block period\nproceedings u/s 153C of the Act has to be computed from the date of\nreceipt of books of accounts or documents

PAWAN AGRAWAL,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3)(1), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Section 151 of the Act clearly stipulates that the\nCommissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who is the competent\nauthority to authorize the reassessment notice, has to apply his\nmind and form an opinion. The mere appending of the expression\n"approved" says nothing. It is not as if the Commissioner of\nIncome-tax (Appeals) has to record elaborate reasons

VIKAS CHANDRA HUF,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD-4(1)(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshvikas Chandra Huf, Vs. Cit(Appeals), D-117, Ramesh Vihar, Nfac, Delhi Ramghar Road, Aligarh Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakjv9476N Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Garg, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

Section 151 of the Act clearly stipulates that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who is the competent authority to authorize the reassessment notice, has to apply his mind and form an opinion. The mere appending of the expression "approved" says nothing. It is not as if the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has to record elaborate reasons for agreeing

RAJANI SAHU,GWALIOR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, ASHOK NAGAR, GWALIOR

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. 420/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) Smt. Rajani Sahu Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ Karera, Near Kali Mai Mandir, Ashok Nagar, Gwalior. Shivpuri Road Vs. Karera, Shivpuri (Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ehpps-3090-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Deependra Mohan, Ca - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 21-05-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act On 27-04-2023. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Of Deemed Income U/S 56(2)(Vii)(B) For Rs.48.90 Lacs. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Same Against Which The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. 2. The Ld. Ar, At The Outset, Raised A Pertinent Legal Issue Assailing Legality Of Reassessment Proceedings. It Has Been Stated That This Year Is Covered By The Decision Of Hon’Ble Delhi High Court In The Case Of Ibibo

reassessment with a new regime. The first proviso to section 149 does not expressly bar the application of Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, Section 3 of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 applies to the entire Income-tax Act, including sections

TARUNA VATSSA,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AGRA

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

section 144 of the Income Tax Act,\n1961, stating that the appellant had two trading accounts with different\nbrokers and that a total transaction of Rs. 15,93,53,566.83 was carried\nout on NSE/BSE during the financial year 2012-13 stating that the\nassessee failed to submit any documentary evidence regarding the\npurchase and sale of shares/commodities

DEEPAK KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O SHRI LATE RATAN LAL AGRAWAL,TIKAMGARH vs. ITO, TIKAMGARH

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Deepak Kumar Agrawal, Vs. Ito, Ward No. 12, Purani Tikamgarh Tehsil, New Housing Board, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Axapa3069L Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

27-04-2011, further cash deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- was made out of the cash withdrawal of Rs. 15,25,000 on 21-04-2011. Accordingly, the learned AO accepted the source for cash deposit to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- and show-caused the Assessee as to why the remaining

SHRI ATUL SRIVASTAVA,AGRA vs. PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 263 of the Act and passing the Impugned Order has failed to appreciate that the Ld. AO in the case of the Appellant passed the Assessment Order dated 31.10.2019 after duly considering all submissions of the Appellant. 4. That the Ld. Pr. CIT while making the order U/S 263 had ignored that the Asstt Order

SMT. SARIKA SRIVASTAVA,AGRA vs. PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 263 of the Act and passing the Impugned Order has failed to appreciate that the Ld. AO in the case of the Appellant passed the Assessment Order dated 31.10.2019 after duly considering all submissions of the Appellant. 4. That the Ld. Pr. CIT while making the order U/S 263 had ignored that the Asstt Order

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

27-09-2021. The grounds as raised by the assessee read as under: - 1.The CIT Appeals has been arbitrarily and unjust while sustaining the addition for Rs.22,00,000/- made by AO treating the amount written to loose papers as an income, no addition is liable to be made, the addition made, on presumption having no supporting evidence in support

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LTD, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.113/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.114/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.115/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.116/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.117/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.118/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.119/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Mahesh Edible Oil Industries Ltd. Acit-Central Circle बनाम/ 3/14-A, Jungpura-B Agra. Vs. New Delhi – 110 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-7102-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.157/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) &

27-12- 2021 which have already been extracted in the assessment order. Upon perusal of the same, It could be seen that Ld. AO has not referred to any incriminating material as found from assessee’s premises during search qua alleged bogus purchases which have ultimately led to impugned additions / rejection of books of accounts of the assessee and which

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

27-09-2021. The grounds as raised by the assessee read as under: - 1.The CIT Appeals has been arbitrarily and unjust while sustaining the addition for Rs.22,00,000/- made by AO treating the amount written to loose papers as an income, no addition is liable to be made, the addition made, on presumption having no supporting evidence in support

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LTD, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.113/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.114/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.115/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.116/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.117/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.118/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.119/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Mahesh Edible Oil Industries Ltd. Acit-Central Circle बनाम/ 3/14-A, Jungpura-B Agra. Vs. New Delhi – 110 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccm-7102-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.157/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) &

27-12- 2021 which have already been extracted in the assessment order. Upon perusal of the same, It could be seen that Ld. AO has not referred to any incriminating material as found from assessee’s premises during search qua alleged bogus purchases which have ultimately led to impugned additions / rejection of books of accounts of the assessee and which

AGRA INFRALAND DEVELOPERS. PVT. LTD,AGRA vs. DCIT, CC- , 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

27-09-2021. The grounds as raised by the assessee read as under: - 1.The CIT Appeals has been arbitrarily and unjust while sustaining the addition for Rs.22,00,000/- made by AO treating the amount written to loose papers as an income, no addition is liable to be made, the addition made, on presumption having no supporting evidence in support