ACIT, C 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA vs. SUNIL KUMAR JOSHAN, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhacit, Vs. Sunil Kumar Joshan, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Circle-2(1)(1), Agra Km Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P Co 07/Agr/2025 (In Ita No.494/Agr/2025) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sunil Kumar Joshan, Vs. Acit, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Km Circle-2(1)(1), Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Agra Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) NFAC considered and appreciated the realisation of the sale consideration in the bank account of the appellant with reference to information collated as per Annexure 6 to the submissions, providing detail of Artwork and price, Invoice of consignment

SH RANJAN KUMAR ARORA,FARRUKHABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(2)(1), FARRUKHABAD

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Ranjan Kumar Arora, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 5/30, Nehru Road, Circle-4(2)(1), Farrukhabad, Up- 2096625 Farrukhabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aakpa0524D Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2025

65,000 and 2,37,000 as unexplained under Section 68 and 69 read with Section 115BBE of the Act and completed

SH. KULDEEP SRIVASTAVA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O., WARD-3(2), MATHURA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10

section 50C and the same is reproduced as under: - Name of the Amount of Stamp Amount Sale Proportionate vendee total sale registration considered amount stamp value consideration value for received for assesse computing by the capital gain assesse 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sanjeev Kumar

ANUPAM MITTAL,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

section 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961 through which the onus automatically shifts upon the Assessing Officer to make independent enquiry about the genuineness of the loans when necessary information about the lender is provided by the Assessee. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) has miserably failed to appreciate the case laws relied upon

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

65, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Gandhi Road, Thatipur Gaon, Ward 2(3), Gwalior. Gwalior (MP). PAN : BCGPS5999R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, CA Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 20.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.09.2025 ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

KAMLA ASSOCIATES,SHEOPUR vs. ACIT-3(1), GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshkamla Associates, Vs. Acit, Pali Road, Sheopur, Circle-3(1), Mp Gwalior Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaffk5366A Assessee By : Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17/03/2026

section 68 of the Act on account of alleged unexplained cash credits in respect of advances received against sale of tractors. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is a dealer of tractors and its spare parts which are Kamla Associates purchased by agriculturists and farmers. The return of income

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), GWALIOR, GWALIOR vs. DHARMENDRA SHARMA, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Through Virtual Hearing) Dharmendra Sharma, Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing In Front Of Narcotics Officer, Office, Ramkala Nagar, Ward-2(1), Morar, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fejps7901J Jurisdictional Assessing Vs. Dharmendra Sharma, Officer, In Front Of Narcotics Office, Ward-2(1), Gwalior Ramkala Nagar, Morar, Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fejps7901J

68,234/- after an amount of Rs 41,030/- was credited to the Government account as TCS under Section 206CH of the Act. The Learned AO simply ignored the submissions of the Assessee and proceeded to make an addition of Rs 3,65

DHARMENDRA SHARMA,GWALIOR vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee as well as the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Through Virtual Hearing) Dharmendra Sharma, Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing In Front Of Narcotics Officer, Office, Ramkala Nagar, Ward-2(1), Morar, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fejps7901J Jurisdictional Assessing Vs. Dharmendra Sharma, Officer, In Front Of Narcotics Office, Ward-2(1), Gwalior Ramkala Nagar, Morar, Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Fejps7901J

68,234/- after an amount of Rs 41,030/- was credited to the Government account as TCS under Section 206CH of the Act. The Learned AO simply ignored the submissions of the Assessee and proceeded to make an addition of Rs 3,65

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

68,605/-, on account of under section 69A of the IT Act, without appreciating the fact of the case that amount of Rs 57.68,605/- debited by the bank but not found recorded in the books of account of the assessee. (vii) That, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & on facts by deleting the addition of Rs.36

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) , GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

section 80IC of the Act as excessively claimed in the sum of Rs 5,65,487/-. Pursuant to the assessment framed, the assessee company did not contest the same by preferring first appeal before the learned Commissioner (appeals). The assessee paid the due taxes in respect of demand raised by the learned AO. The assessee filed Form No. 68

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

section 80IC of the Act as excessively claimed in the sum of Rs 5,65,487/-. Pursuant to the assessment framed, the assessee company did not contest the same by preferring first appeal before the learned Commissioner (appeals). The assessee paid the due taxes in respect of demand raised by the learned AO. The assessee filed Form No. 68

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

section 80IC of the Act as excessively claimed in the sum of Rs 5,65,487/-. Pursuant to the assessment framed, the assessee company did not contest the same by preferring first appeal before the learned Commissioner (appeals). The assessee paid the due taxes in respect of demand raised by the learned AO. The assessee filed Form No. 68

SH SANJAY BANSAL ,MORENA vs. A.C.I.T (CENTRAL), GWALIOR

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

Bench: learned CIT(Appeals) who has very exhaustively passed the impugned order in 60 pages and considered all the submissions of the assessee in the tabulated form and otherwise, which need not to be repeated again for the sake of brevity. However, learned CIT(Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal confirming the addition only to the extent of Rs.71,44,045/- as against addition of Rs.91,06,669/-. 4. Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds : "1.Because in any view, th

65 of paper book, Cash book at page no. 66 to 67 of paper book. On examination of these pages of Paper Book in the course of appellate proceedings, it has been found that the appellant has shown opening cash balance of Rs.6,00,000/- as on 01.04.2011. The appellant has not furnished the basis of opening cash balance

GHANSHYAM ,MATHURA vs. ITO 3(2), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

65,000/- the authorities below failed to consider that 'appellant' has entered into an agreement with Ghasi Ram another Agriculturist who has provided funds to the 'appellant' from which Agriculture Land was purchased. 5. BECAUSE, in any case and in any view of the matter impugned additions/disallowances and impugned assessment order is bad in law, illegal, unjustified barred by limitation

GHANSHYAM ,MATHURA vs. ITO 3(2), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

65,000/- the authorities below failed to consider that 'appellant' has entered into an agreement with Ghasi Ram another Agriculturist who has provided funds to the 'appellant' from which Agriculture Land was purchased. 5. BECAUSE, in any case and in any view of the matter impugned additions/disallowances and impugned assessment order is bad in law, illegal, unjustified barred by limitation