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)

68 read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Gift) Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 - Assessee received certain amount as gifts from his father and sister who were non-residents in India - Assessing Officer after making detailed enquiries, took a view that assessee had duly proved identity, source and creditworthiness of donors - Commissioner

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)

68 read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Gift) Assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 - Assessee received certain amount as gifts from his father and sister who were non-residents in India - Assessing Officer after making detailed enquiries, took a view that assessee had duly proved identity, source and creditworthiness of donors - Commissioner

VEENA SINGH,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2015-16

172 days according to the report of the Registry. However, in Form No. 36, assessee has mentioned the date of service of the impugned order as 19.06.2025, hence, in view of section 253(3) of the Act, the appeal appears to be belated by a single day, which stands condoned in the interest of justice. 3. Brief facts state

A.C.I.T.-2, AGRA vs. SMT. NEETA SHARMA PROP., AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

68,828 had to offer securities to the extent of Rs. 9,95,000. As per the balance sheet as on 31-3-1972, security had been offered to the tune of Rs. 6,42,703, that is, closing stock of Rs. 4,17,370 fixed assets being Rs. 1,73,333 and fixed deposit certificates being

SMT. NEETA SHARMA,AGRA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08

68,828 had to offer securities to the extent of Rs. 9,95,000. As per the balance sheet as on 31-3-1972, security had been offered to the tune of Rs. 6,42,703, that is, closing stock of Rs. 4,17,370 fixed assets being Rs. 1,73,333 and fixed deposit certificates being

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)

4. 17.10.2014. Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and P.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. at premises Pushpanjali Palace, Delhi Gate, Agra. The case of the assessee was transferred to the 5. 20.07.2015 DCIT, Central Circle, Agra vide order passed under section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed return of income for Assessment 6. 17.10.2016 Year

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)

4. 17.10.2014. Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and P.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. at premises Pushpanjali Palace, Delhi Gate, Agra. The case of the assessee was transferred to the 5. 20.07.2015 DCIT, Central Circle, Agra vide order passed under section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed return of income for Assessment 6. 17.10.2016 Year

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)

4. 17.10.2014. Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and P.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. at premises Pushpanjali Palace, Delhi Gate, Agra. The case of the assessee was transferred to the 5. 20.07.2015 DCIT, Central Circle, Agra vide order passed under section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed return of income for Assessment 6. 17.10.2016 Year

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

4. 17.10.2014. Page numbers 44,45 and 46 of Document Lp-22 from 1 to 50 were seized from the search of Pushpanjali Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Pushpanjali Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and P.P. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. at premises Pushpanjali Palace, Delhi Gate, Agra. 5. 20.07.2015 The case of the assessee was transferred to the DCIT, Central Circle, Agra

HYDRISE FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

68,040/- Yours Faithfully, (Pratibha Singh) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-08, New Delhi” 11. From the above proposal, it is clear that the same is not accompanied by any assessment folder, seized material or any other related documents for completion of assessment. It means that before the Additional CIT, only a proposal vide letter F.No.ACIT/Central

HYDRISE FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

68,040/- Yours Faithfully, (Pratibha Singh) Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-08, New Delhi” 11. From the above proposal, it is clear that the same is not accompanied by any assessment folder, seized material or any other related documents for completion of assessment. It means that before the Additional CIT, only a proposal vide letter F.No.ACIT/Central