“appeal before CIT(A)”

Arvind G. Valvi, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Surat vs. Sweety Gems Private Limited, Surat

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.975/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Sweety Gems Pvt. Ltd., Ward -2(1)(3), 101, Nishit Diamond Complex, Gujjar Surat Falia, Haripura, Surat - 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aancs4270N (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.29/Srt/2024 (Arising In Ita No.975/Srt/2024) Assessment Year: (2014-15) Sweety Gems Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Ito, 101, Nishit Diamond Complex, Gujjar Ward -2(1)(3), Falia, Haripura, Surat - 395003 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aancs4270N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Rs.10,94,05,000/- u/s 69A of the Act to the total income. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). During appellate proceedings, appellant submitted books of account, ledger account showing trading of diamonds with M/s Sheetal Export, invoices, audit reports and assessment ... Sheetal Export are only sham transactions to accommodate funds in the name of running business activities of cut and polished diamond. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the addition because both the appellant and M/s Sheetal Exports had undergone search action u/s 132 of the Act and were assessed

Jigar Dilkhushbhai Shah, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shripawan Singh& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.299/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Jigar Dilkhushbhai Shah, Vs. The Ito, F/17, 1203-4, Green City, Palgam Ward- 2(3)(6), Bhatha, Surat-395009 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bbsps8457F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

No.299/SRT/2024/AY.17-18 Jigar Dilkushbhai Shah 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) issued 4 notices fixing the hearing on 09.02.2021, 24.10.2023, 14.12.2023 and 11.01.2024. But there was no compliance by the appellant to the aforesaid notices. Hence, the CIT(A) proceeded

Abdulrehman Abdulhay Bhanapatel, Surat vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.20/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybridhearing) Abdulrehman Abdulhay Bhanapatel, Vs. The Ito, 18, Tekari Street, Eklera Bhanodra, Ward-2(3)(1), Choryasi, Surat - 394230 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Blnpb7848C (Appellant) (Respondent)

making addition of Rs.54,01,224/- u/s 50C of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) passed his order u/s 250 of the Act on 29.11.2023. In the order, he hasdiscussed about the provisions of section

Shri Jagdish Kumar Gulia, Bhopal vs. Thre Asstt.Directore of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

paid to relevant funds upto the due dates prescribed under PF/ESI laws. Aggrieved by such adjustment, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal before CIT(A). During first-appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the disallowance made by AO following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services

Prasam Rakesh Choudhary, Girnar Society, Bapurao Galli vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central -1, Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

based on material available with him. He submitted that in any case, the assessee has no explainable reason for non-prosecution of his appeals before CIT(A). He submitted that when the lapses are attributable to assessee, the orders of lower authorities must be upheld without giving any relief ... have perused the order of appeal in open court during hearing and find that the assessee has raised meritorious grounds in first-appeal before CIT(A) challenging the legality of proceedings conducted by AO as well as merits which require an apt adjudication by CIT(A). Therefore, the present cases

Prasam Rakesh Choudhary, Girnar Society, Bapurao Galli vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Prasam Rakesh Choudhary, Girnar Society, Bapurao Galli vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central - 1, Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

based on material available with him. He submitted that in any case, the assessee has no explainable reason for non-prosecution of his appeals before CIT(A). He submitted that when the lapses are attributable to assessee, the orders of lower authorities must be upheld without giving any relief ... have perused the order of appeal in open court during hearing and find that the assessee has raised meritorious grounds in first-appeal before CIT(A) challenging the legality of proceedings conducted by AO as well as merits which require an apt adjudication by CIT(A). Therefore, the present cases

Prasam Rakesh Choudhary, Girnar Society, Bapurao Galli vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central - 1, Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

based on material available with him. He submitted that in any case, the assessee has no explainable reason for non-prosecution of his appeals before CIT(A). He submitted that when the lapses are attributable to assessee, the orders of lower authorities must be upheld without giving any relief ... have perused the order of appeal in open court during hearing and find that the assessee has raised meritorious grounds in first-appeal before CIT(A) challenging the legality of proceedings conducted by AO as well as merits which require an apt adjudication by CIT(A). Therefore, the present cases

Prasam Rakesh Choudhary, Girnar Society, Itwari, Nagpur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

based on material available with him. He submitted that in any case, the assessee has no explainable reason for non-prosecution of his appeals before CIT(A). He submitted that when the lapses are attributable to assessee, the orders of lower authorities must be upheld without giving any relief ... have perused the order of appeal in open court during hearing and find that the assessee has raised meritorious grounds in first-appeal before CIT(A) challenging the legality of proceedings conducted by AO as well as merits which require an apt adjudication by CIT(A). Therefore, the present cases

Surya Realcon Private Limited, Saraidhela, Dhanbad vs. DCIT, Aayakar Bhawan, Dhanbad

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

filing of return was 30.09.2018 and the return is filed on 31.03.2019 due to valid reasons. 12. That we had preferred an appeal before CIT(A) where the Learned appellate authority has rejected our submission without provided any valid reasons for their rejection. 13. That the Learned Appellate authority ... Aggrieved with order u/s 143(1), the assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The grounds of appeal of the assessee was "That the return filed u/s 139(4) is to be treated as sufficient compliance in this provision of the Act was expounded that subsection (1) & subsection

Surya Realcon Private Limited, Saraidhela, Dhanbad vs. DCIT, Aayakar Bhawan, Dhanbad

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

filing of return was 30.09.2018 and the return is filed on 31.03.2019 due to valid reasons. 12. That we had preferred an appeal before CIT(A) where the Learned appellate authority has rejected our submission without provided any valid reasons for their rejection. 13. That the Learned Appellate authority ... Aggrieved with order u/s 143(1), the assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The grounds of appeal of the assessee was "That the return filed u/s 139(4) is to be treated as sufficient compliance in this provision of the Act was expounded that subsection (1) & subsection

Shree Pipardi Seva Sahakari Mandali Limited, Surendranagar vs. The ITO Ward-2 (1) (2), Rajkot

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 448/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2019-20)

considering the contention of Ld. AR of the assessee and the fact that there was delay of only 1310 days in filing appeal before CIT(A). The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessee is not going to be benefited by filing the appeal late before L.CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

concerns of Shri Rajendra Jain group, Shri Dharmichand Jain group and Shri Sanjay Chaudhary group. On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the addition made by AO. On further appeal, the ITAT, Surat vide order dated 09.11.2021 involving AYs from 2009-10 to 2012-13 restricted the estimated addition ... being 100% of tax sought to be evaded. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before CIT(A) where appellant raised three grounds including validity of the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and merit of the penalty imposed