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

Section 148 and the entire reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are liable to be quashed as void ab initio. 3.1 Reliance may be placed on the following decisions: (a) S. Goyanka Lime and Chemicals Ltd., (2015) 56

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

Section 148 and the entire reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are liable to be quashed as void ab initio. 3.1 Reliance may be placed on the following decisions: (a) S. Goyanka Lime and Chemicals Ltd., (2015) 56

BHAGIRATH PAKHARIA,JHANSI vs. WARD 2 (3)(1), JHANSI

56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, the final assessment order added the entire sale consideration under Section 69A as unexplained money.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reassessment

ANIL KUMAR YADAV LEGAL HEIR SMT. LONG SHREE ,MAINPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(2)(4), MAINPURI

reassessment jurisdiction, we take up the same first. We\nfind that the approval has been granted by approving authority by stating\nthat “Yes I am satisfied on the reasons record by the AO as at ‘A' that it\nis a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T.Act.”. The approval given\nin this manner would not stand

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

56,407/- The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 11.07.2012, declaring total income of Rs.8,16,230/-. Case of the assessee was reopened by the Revenue for framing reassessment by invoking provisions

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Through Virtual Hearing) Anju Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, D-26, Kamla Nagar, Ward-2(1)(1), Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Awtpa4297L Assessee By : Shri K. K. Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

reassessment stood completed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 23-3- 2024 determining total income of the Assessee at Rs. 56

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-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

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

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

56 taxmann.com 390 (MP HC). The Special\nLeave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision was dismissed by\nthe Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 64 taxmann.com 313. Further, I find\nthat the Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of PCIT Vs. NC Cables Ltd\nreported in 391 ITR 11 (Del) had also held the same

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

56 taxmann.com 390 (MP HC). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 64 taxmann.com 313. Further, I find that the Hon‟ble Delhi High court in the case of PCIT Vs. NC Cables Ltd reported in 391 ITR 11 (Del) had also held the same

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. M/S FEDERAL AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

reassessment completed u/s 147 read with section 143(3) in respect of purchases of ‘Raw Boneless Meat’, which has been treated as bogus. The assessee contended before the Assessing Officer that no purchases of ‘Raw Boneless Meat’ have been made and, in fact, certain purchases have been made by the “HMA Agro Industries Ltd.”, which is a separate assessee

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

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

SMT. PURNIMA SHARMA,GWALIOR vs. ITO., WARD-2(2),, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

reassessment proceeding, it was noticed by the AO that total sales shown by the assessee was Rs.7,22,56,800/- as against purchase of Rs.7,02,75,625/- and assessee generated Gross Profit of Rs.19,81,175/-. Further, the assessee had shown Net Profit @0.32% of Rs.2,30,552/-. The assessee filed her return of income on 17.10.2017 declaring total

OM PRAKASH,HATHRAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3)(4), HATHRAS, HATHRAS

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Om Prakash, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Village Baramai, Ward-4(3)(4), Sadabad, Hathras Hathras (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dkbpp7713K

56,470/- stated by the Learned AO in the reasons and in the assessment order respectively. Further, in the reasons recorded, the Learned AO had not even mentioned the correct address of the assessee and had not even mentioned the PAN of the assessee. Further, some other assessee’s name has been mentioned in the said reasons recorded. All these

SUDHINDRA PAL SINGH,ETAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), ETAH, ETAH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sudhindra Pal Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bara Bhondela, At Bara Ward-3(2), Bhondela, Awagarh, Etah Etah- 207 301, Etah (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ekyps0396P

reassessment proceedings. 3. Since this additional ground, being a purely legal issue and facts relevant for its adjudication are already on record, I admit the said additional ground and take up first for the purpose of adjudication. 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In this case, information was received by the office

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) &

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

MAHESH EDIBLE OIL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA

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) &

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened