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

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

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

Section 10(23C) on the requirement that a college must maintain the status- quo, as it were, in regard to its knowledge based infrastructure. Nor for that matter is an educational institution prohibited from upgrading its infrastructure on educational facilities save on the pain of losing the benefit of the exemption under Section 10(23C). Imposing such

VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

72,065.00 Advance Against Sale of Land 68,50,000.00 Investments 50,23,797.06 Vibhav Kumar 8,36,987.00 Flate at Parshvnath at Panorma.G.Noida 42,07,621.00 Gh'aziabad Dev. Authority 500.00 Current Liabilities 8,55,290.00 Jay Pee Infratech Limited. (Klassic) 2,00,000.00 8,55,290.00 Shares VSS (P) Ltd. 25,000.00 Venus Automotive Service Indie

SHRI OM PRAKASH SINGH,MATHURA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, AGRA

In the result appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2. Vide Grounds No. 1 to 4 assessee has challenged the action of the authorities below in making trading addition by application of N.P rate @8% on contract receipts ignoring the past history of the assessee which as per judicial opinion is a material consideration for estimation of income while proceeding under section

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. M/S. UNITED FARM PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED, AGRA

In the result, appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhacit, Cc, Vs. M/S. United Farm Product Pvt. Ltd., 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002 (Agra) (Pan :Aaccu2505M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Shri Deependra Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 Date Of Order : 04.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kanpur – 4 Dated 28.03.2025 For Assessment Year2022-23 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “L. Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law. The Ld. Cit(A)-Iv. Kanpur Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,71,37,934/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure U/S 69C Of The Act Incurred For Construction Of Plant At Mewat, Haryana, Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Company Itself Has Surrendered Amount Of Rs.41,40,35,700/- & Admitted To Take The Unexplained Expenditure At Rs.43,71,37,934/- Incurred In The 2 Construction Of Said Plant. Hence, The Addition Made By The Ao Is Based On Admittance By The Assessee, Which Is Corroborated By The Incriminating Material Found During The Course Of Search. 2. Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A)-Iv. Kanpur Has Erred In Deleting The Addition. Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessing Officer Has Passed The Assessment Order After Thoroughly Examining & Analysing The Seized Material & Proper Appreciation Of Facts Of Unexplained Expenditure U/S 69C Of The Act.”

72,187/- has been spent in cash being unexplained expenditure. iv. Thereafter, allowing benefit of funds of Rs 85,44,17,560/- (Balance of 44,03,81,860 in the audited Balance Sheet of HMA + 41,40,35,700 surrendered by HMA on account of construction in Mewat) as received from its holding company namely HMA Agro Industries Limited, balance

MARSHAL SECURITY SERVICES,AGRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

section 68 of the Act. AO converted limited\nscrutiny to complete scrutiny on 14.12.2017 and framed order on 28.12.2017.\nContention of the Assessee: Assessee submitted that AO enquired on\nunsecured loans prior to 14.12.2017, whereas he got approval on 14.12.2017\nand it is against the provision of the ACT.\nHeld:That the assessing officer has exceeded his jurisdiction

HARSH SALUJA,MATHURA vs. ITO 3(2), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

68 of the I.T. Act of aggregate cash deposit of Rs. 12,97,291/- (3,30,471 + 9,66,820) in Union Bank of India SB A/c No. 2969 as it is a settled law that Bank Pass Book is not Books of Accounts hence the addition confirmed by the ld. CIT (A), is wrong, illegal and against the peculiar

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AGRA vs. CHITAVALSAH JUTE MILLS LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Acit, Vs. Chitavalasah Jute Mills Ltd, Range-1, 73-74, 201, Sheetala House, Faridabad Nehru Place, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccc6834D Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 15/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

68 or section 41 of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer also did not make any inquiry with respect to the above figure of Rs 49,72,098. The appellant has submitted a number of case laws, in respect of ad-hoc addition as well as non-specification of the provisions of the Act under which the addition

M/S SHIVHARE ASSOCIATES,GWALIOR vs. J.C.I.T., RANGE-1, GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Shivhare Associates, Jcit, Range-1, 44, Sindh Bihar, Nadi Gate, Vs. Gwalior Gwalior Pan Abbfs 6377 G

72 /AGR/2015 (Assessment Year 2011-12) ACIT, Circle-1, M/s Shivhare Associates, Gwalior Vs. Jinsi Nala No.1, Chhaparwala Pul, Lashkar Gate, Gwalior PAN ABBFS 6377 G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 47 and 48/Agr/2015 Appellant by: Shri K.C. Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR And Date of hearing: 21/03/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 16/05/2018 ORDER PER BENCH: These Cross

M/S SHIVHARE ASSOCIATES,GWALIOR vs. A.C.I.T., RANGE-1, GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Shivhare Associates, Jcit, Range-1, 44, Sindh Bihar, Nadi Gate, Vs. Gwalior Gwalior Pan Abbfs 6377 G

72 /AGR/2015 (Assessment Year 2011-12) ACIT, Circle-1, M/s Shivhare Associates, Gwalior Vs. Jinsi Nala No.1, Chhaparwala Pul, Lashkar Gate, Gwalior PAN ABBFS 6377 G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 47 and 48/Agr/2015 Appellant by: Shri K.C. Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR And Date of hearing: 21/03/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 16/05/2018 ORDER PER BENCH: These Cross

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

2,52,012.19 and Lock and Key loans to the extent of Rs. 4,16,815.81, the total being Rs. 6,68,828. The Bank was advancing loans to the extent of a maximum of 70 per cent of the value of the securities offered. The assessee, in order to secure loan of Rs. 6,68,828 had to offer

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

2,52,012.19 and Lock and Key loans to the extent of Rs. 4,16,815.81, the total being Rs. 6,68,828. The Bank was advancing loans to the extent of a maximum of 70 per cent of the value of the securities offered. The assessee, in order to secure loan of Rs. 6,68,828 had to offer

M/S SHIVHARE ROADLINES,GWALIOR vs. JT. C.I.T., RANGE-2, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2. In Board’s Circular No. 609, dated 29-7-1991 (Sl. No. 244) it was clarified that where a tour operator or travel agent uses motor buses or motor taxis owned by him in providing transportation services to tourists, higher rate of depreciation would be allowed on such vehicles. It is further clarified that higher depreciation will also

MODERN AGENCIES,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-6, JHANSI

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

section 144 i.e. ‘Best Judgment Assessment.’ 3. The assessment of income as per discussion above is framed below: “a. The value of phyiscial stock taken on date of survey was Rs.1,30,14,587/-. The partner of the firms, Sh. Mukesh Agarwal in his statement on the date of survey was confronted with this stock inventory which was taken

RAGHUVENDRA KUMAR VARSHNEY,ALIGARH vs. I.T.O., WARD-1, ALIGARH

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

section 148 of the Act. Bare reading of ‘reasons recorded’ in the light of law laid down by the Hon’ble Courts in this regard would show that those are ‘No Reasons’ in the eyes of law being based on new material facts on record and mere change of opinion by the Assessing officer recording alleged ’satisfaction’ of ‘escapement

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is partly

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

72,50,43,496, resulting in an arbitrary addition of 71,48,87,770, solely based on assumptions, conjectures, and surmises, without any comparable case OR corroborative material to substantiate such estimation. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) NFAC (hereinafter referred

ITO, ALIGARH vs. RASHID LALOO, ALIGARH

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

68,85,320/- on adhoc basis. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals) against the said assessment order dated 17.03.2022. Learned CIT(A), after considering assessee’s submissions and documentary evidences, allowed assessee’s first appeal, holding that on animal sales turnover of Rs.33,02,83,735/-, net profit rate of 0.22% shall be 2

KRISHNA KUMAR GUPTA,ETAH vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

72,753/-. Based on the information received from insight portal, case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act on the basis of verification suspicious transaction report dated 26.02.2020 uploaded by ADIT (Inv.) Aligarh and investigation regarding cash deposit/bank credits in the bank account of assessee was made with reference to the transactions/turnover declared by the assessee, during