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

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

147 on legal issues but the\nlegal issues were not decided by the AO. It was submitted that that the\nAssessing Officer has added entire cash deposits in the bank account\nwithout giving credit forthe sales of the assessee. There are other\nincomes in Profit and loss account, for which no credit was given. Bank\naccount was fully explained with

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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(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

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

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

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

credit. Pertinently, this\nletter refers to AY 2019-20 only and not to AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19. In\nfact, no purchases have been made by the assessee from these three\nconcerns during AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19. Thus, the material referred to\nby Ld. AO in the assessment order was either relating to pre-search\nperiod

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

credit. Pertinently, this\nletter refers to AY 2019-20 only and not to AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19. In\nfact, no purchases have been made by the assessee from these three\nconcerns during AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19. Thus, the material referred to\nby Ld. AO in the assessment order was either relating to pre-search\nperiod

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

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

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

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

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

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated by the Assessing Officer, DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. The only issue to be decided on merits in this appeal is as to whether the Learned JCIT(Appeals) was justified in confirming the addition