← All Phrases

“Section 142(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 142Section 142(1)15,051 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 142(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 142(1)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

Judgments citing Section 142(1)

Shri Dinesh Man Singh, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- II, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 587/LKW/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Dinesh Man Singh Dcit Central Circle-Ii V. Shri Kanchan Khanna, 15/45- Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, B, Civil Lines, Kanpur-208001. Allenganj, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Acqpm1819H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vikas Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Shree Samprat Coop Hsg Soc Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 470/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Shrivastav, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 57

declaring total income at Rs.Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) followed by notice under section 142(1) was issued. However, despite repeated notices and reminders, there was minimal compliance by the assessee during assessment proceedings. From the Income and Expenditure Account, the Assessing

Karm Gas Service, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(7) Presently the ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1252/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Anil N. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 69A

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

The DCIT Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ram Agri Infra Structure India Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA No. 1733/Ahd/2019 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objection no

ITA 1733/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Sandeep Kumar Gupta, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 29(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sandeep Kr. Gupta ……………...……………………………..….……….Appellant 27/H/2, Gobra Gorasthan Road, Kolkata – 46. [Pan: Agspg8435F] Vs. Ito, Ward-29(1), Kolkata……..............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Indranil Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 21.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 336 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.7,63,000/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy

Apurva Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 2646/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

Date of service of Notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act Date(s) of issue of Notice(s) under section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act Order passed under section Returned Income Date of Order DIN AAACN2937Q APURVA NATVAR PARIKH & CO.PRIVATE LIMITED 96, CHEMBUR MANKHURD LINK

B.N. Exports, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 20(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 1123/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanm/S B. N. Exports Vs. Acit Range 20(1), Nightingale Chs, Bldg No. 2, Flat Piramal Chambers, Parel, No. 201, Second Floor, Hindustan Mumbai. Naka, Charkop Rd, Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aaafb1156E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR

Samoo Designers & Engineers India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-22(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2396/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 2396/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Income Tax Officer, Shivom Trexim Private Ltd., Ward-1, Room No.203, Vs. Plot No.26, Sector-25, Aayakar Bhawan, Sector-6, Huda Part-Ii, Panipat, Panipat, Haryana. Haryana. Pan No.Aapcs8392H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 68

ITANo.2396/Del/2024 SHIVOM TREXIM PVT. LTD. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA

Shri Atul Srivastava, Agra vs. PCIT-1, Agra

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

ITA 57/AGR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

Smt. Sarika Srivastava, Agra vs. PCIT-1, Agra

The appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

ITA 56/AGR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

Uday Karchi, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4 Belagavi, Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/PAN/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.54/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) Uday Karchi, Vs I.T.O Ward-4, Post.Ainapur,Karchi Gully Civil Hospital Road, . Taluka,Athani, Belgaum-590001. Belgaum-591303, Karnataka. Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Bewpk2983K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri.Sureshkumar C.B.Sr.Dr

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Shri Nidhi Credit Co-Oprative Society Limited, Rajkot vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 936/RJT/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Shr Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.936/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri J.R. Mankodi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

PCIT and other material brought on record. We note that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act, dated 16.01.2020, which is placed at paper book page no.15, wherein the Assessing Officer has especially asked the assessee, to furnish eligibility criteria ... furnish the documentary evidence in support of its claim of deduction under Chapter VI-A. In response to the said notice under section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee has submitted its reply, dated 01.12.2020 (vide paper book page nos. 17 ITA No.936/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 14-15 Sh.Nidhi Credit

Shiv Green Energy Private Limited, Jamnagar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees(ITA No

ITA 595/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 595/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Green Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 107, Divyam Park, Jamnagar 361001 Opp. H.O. Bhatt Bunglow, Nr. Sanjeevani Medical Store, Jamnagar - 361006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aascs8645J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, Ld. ARFor Respondent: ShriSanjay Pungalia, Ld. CIT. (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 28. We note that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer has issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act, which is placed at PB Page No.13 to 19 of the assessee`s paper book. In the said notice, the assessing officer ... whether this stock relates to the business.The important question raised by the assessing officer, during the assessment proceedings, by way of notice under section 142(1) of the Act, is reproduced below: 1. Details of other income with supporting documents: 2. Valuation of closing stock. 3. Details of income offered

Ashok Gopaldas Vithlani, Jamkhambhaliya vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees(ITA No

ITA 229/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 595/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Green Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 107, Divyam Park, Jamnagar 361001 Opp. H.O. Bhatt Bunglow, Nr. Sanjeevani Medical Store, Jamnagar - 361006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aascs8645J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, Ld. ARFor Respondent: ShriSanjay Pungalia, Ld. CIT. (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 28. We note that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer has issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act, which is placed at PB Page No.13 to 19 of the assessee`s paper book. In the said notice, the assessing officer ... whether this stock relates to the business.The important question raised by the assessing officer, during the assessment proceedings, by way of notice under section 142(1) of the Act, is reproduced below: 1. Details of other income with supporting documents: 2. Valuation of closing stock. 3. Details of income offered

Pankajkumar Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rakjot vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 81/RJT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara | बनाम Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Vs. Pan: Aampl 3903 F Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2 Rajkot, 2Nd Floor, Amruta Estate, M.G. Rad, Rajkot-360 001 (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोटन्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJКОТ BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT

Pankajkumar Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 80/RJT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Pan: Aampl 3903 F (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2 Rajkot, 2Nd Floor, Amruta Estate, M.G. Rad, Rajkot-360 001 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/03/2025 : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोटन्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT

Pankajkumar Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 79/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40

BATHS AAS OT, ASTHMA SATA | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT

Pankajkumar Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rakjot vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 78/RJT/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

reasonable cause failed to comply with a notice under section 22(4) / 23(2) of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922 or under section 142(1) / 143(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961. NO. dated have concealed the particulars of your income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income

Pankajkumar Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. The Actit, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 77/RJT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Pan: Aampl 3903 F (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोटन्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT

Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 76/RJT/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40

ITA No.76 to 81/RJT/2022 (AY 8-09 to 12-13 & 14-15) Pankaj C Lodhiya आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोटन्यायपीठ, राजकोट