GOVIND SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(1), MATHURA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

unexplained cash credit vide assessment order dated 30.03.2022. 2. At the very outset, we notice that despite, appellant assessee having raised several grounds of appeal before the tribunal, an additional legal ground has also been raised through an application dated 14.01.2026, which reads as under: “That the assessment competed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the IT Act in consequence

SHRI SIYARAM YADAV,MAINPURI vs. ITO 2(5), MAINPURI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

credits introduced by the assessee and mat the same be taxed in the hands of the assessee as well, i.e. the same income be taxed twice which is not allowed as per law. Thus, it terms of section 147 the notice issued u/s.148 is barred by limitation as there is no escapement of income and no failure on the part

RATNESH KUMAR JAIN,SHIVPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ASHOK NAGAR, GWALIOR

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

cash deposited. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,28,13,500/- to the income of the assesseedeemed as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. The AO further held that as the assessee did not filed his return of income in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 30.03.2021 within time prescribed

DY.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA vs. M/S VACMET PACKAGINGS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., AGRA

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

cash credit without appreciating the fact that the identity and creditworthiness of the investor company along with genuineness of the transactions were not proved to the satisfaction of the AO and as required u/s 68 of the IT. Act. 15. That CIT (A) has erred in law and facts in giving a finding of facts that the said

SHRI NARESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

credits introduced by the assessee and mat the same be taxed in the hands of the assessee as well, i.e. the same income be taxed twice which is not allowed as per law. Thus, it terms of section 147 the notice issued u/s.148 is barred by limitation as there is no escapement of income and no failure on the part

SARMAN RAI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3)(3), JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13

u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals), who dismissed the same vide impugned order. 4. The assessee has filed this appeal before the tribunal on the following grounds : “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Authorities below have erred both on facts

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

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

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

cash/ credit entries in the bank account of the assessee are not explained to the extent of Rs. 28,20,500/-. Accordingly, the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after recording reasons initiated proceedings u/s 148 of the act and issued notice on 30.03.2021 after obtaining approval from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act. The assessee filed his return

AJIT SINGH,SHIVPURI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GWALIOR

In the result, assessee’s appeal ITA No 263/Agr/2025 is allowed

147 of the Act, accepting the returned income vide assessment order dated 22.12.2017. 3. Ld PCIT, while exercising revisional powers vested in him u/s. 263 of the Act, passed original revisional order dated 26.03.2020 and observed that assessee had taken advance of Rs. 77,73,275/- against the sale of land on behalf of asssessee’s sons Amir Singh & Shabeer

INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1)(5) ORAI, ORAI, DISTT. JALAUN vs. VIPLAV SINGH, DISTT. JALAUN

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhito, Vs. Viplav Singh, Ward-2(1)(5), 2806, Churkhi Road Orai Orai (Jalaun), Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fhxps6177R Assessee By : None Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Revenue By: Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2026

unexplained credits in the bank account in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 4. We have heard the ld DR and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has not filed his return of income for AY 2018-19. The ld Assessing Officer got information that there was huge cash withdrawals made by the assessee from

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

reassessment proceedings, the AO made an enquiry from the Md. Irfan vide summons issued dated 26.03.2023 forming part of Supplementary paper Book at page 1,and the statement of Md. Irfan recorded on oath, wherein he had admitted that, he is engaged in trading of Alive animals and also confirmed that, he had made sales to assessee and also

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

reassessment proceedings, the AO made an enquiry from the Md. Irfan vide summons issued dated 26.03.2023 forming part of Supplementary paper Book at page 1,and the statement of Md. Irfan recorded on oath, wherein he had admitted that, he is engaged in trading of Alive animals and also confirmed that, he had made sales to assessee and also

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

reassessment proceedings, the AO made an enquiry from the Md. Irfan vide summons issued dated 26.03.2023 forming part of Supplementary paper Book at page 1,and the statement of Md. Irfan recorded on oath, wherein he had admitted that, he is engaged in trading of Alive animals and also confirmed that, he had made sales to assessee and also