IRM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1590/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Irm Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Irm House, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Off. C.G Raod, Circle 2(1)(1), Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380009. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaci3678M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

144 due to non-compliance with statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1). Thereafter, in appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) issued several hearing notices, and the assessee did file written submissions. However, on perusal of the appellate order, particularly paragraph 6.8, we find that the CIT(A) has confirmed all three additions summarily, without rendering any reasoned finding

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI SIDDHATHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

TDS, TCS. Advance Tax or Self- Assessment Tax paid u/s 140A. 4. Proviso to Sec. 244A(1) as relied upon is not applicable to the facts of the case, which is in fact governed by the provisions of Sec. 244A(1)(h), being in any other case. The amount of Rs. 75,04,960/-as determined to be refundable

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

TDS there on. The A.R. of the appellant also argued that the appellant was earlier "AA" rated government contractor and has very rich and wide experience of carrying out the work awarded to him by M/s Ketan construction limited and M/s Aroma Realities Limited. The A.R. of the appellant also contended that there is specific agreement between

SHRI RUSHABHDEV SWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

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

144 read with section 147, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The assessee raised multiple legal and factual grounds, contending that the reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid and that the addition of Rs. 75,41,227/- made by the Assessing Officer was wholly unjustified. 6. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee explained

AMBIS TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Ambis Technologies P Ltd The Ito, C/O.Divyang J. Shah Vs Ward-1(1)(1) 201, 2Nd Floor, Devashish Complex Ahmedabad. Nr.Regenta Central Antarim Hotel Off Cg Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aalca 0742 K (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By : Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

144 of the Act on 28.02.2023, making an addition of Rs.17,17,950/- by treating the purchases as non-genuine. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the said assessment, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), vide order dated 28.11.2024, invoked the provisions

VINPACK AGRO PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. ITO 4(1)(4) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 144 of the Act. The Assessing Officer after taking cognisance of the ITS details available on record has made addition of A.Y: 2010-11 Page 4 of 6 Rs.40,00,000/- thereby observing that from the verification of bank statement the assessee invested Rs.14,70,000/- to purchase units of Mutual Fund of Reliance Mutual Fund on 01.09.2009 which

CHANDRAKANT GORDHANBHAI PATEL HUF ,DABHOI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(3), VADODARA, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: The Final Hearing Of This Appeal Petition…”

section 144 in able to proceed to frame best judgment assessment , and Show Cause notice dated 10/12/2019 was issued by the AO to the assessee as to why reassessment should not be concluded u/s.144 of the Act ex-parte on the basis of material available on record. The assessee filed written submissions before the AO in response

ARUNBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2019-20

TDS of amount of Rs.1,06,982/- and Rs.5,65,493/- was detected and the same was treated as addition under the head Income from Other Sources. 4. Being aggrieved by eh Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

THE DCIT (INT.TAXA.), VADODARA vs. SHRI AJOY KANAIYALAL KHANDHERIA, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.451/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 3337, Nr. Palaiya Mahakali Ward-3 V/S. Mandir Gandhinagar Pethapur, Gandhinagar Gandhinagar – 382 610 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afepv 3269 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 19/01/2024, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Which Upheld The Order Of The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] Dated 30/12/2019, Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"]. Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2012-13

144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 Facts of the Case: 2. The assessee did not file his return of income for the AY 2012-13, claiming that his total income was below the taxable limit and there was no requirement to file

MUKESH BATUBHAI DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

TDS under Section 194A was deducted. On the basis of these information, the case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2022. In the course of assessment, there was no compliance by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had completed the assessment ex-parte

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(2), (FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1035873474(1) , dated 24-09-2021, and the second appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 87/Ahd/2024 has arisen from the appellate order dated 27.10.2023 passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1057462179(1) , which appeal before ld. CIT(A) in turn has arisen from

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2)(FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1035873474(1) , dated 24-09-2021, and the second appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 87/Ahd/2024 has arisen from the appellate order dated 27.10.2023 passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1057462179(1) , which appeal before ld. CIT(A) in turn has arisen from

EYLEX FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on part of the assessee. The assessment was completed under Section 144 of the Act on ex-parte basis

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1) AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. SONABEN ANILKUMAR VARIYA, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) Sonaben Anilkumar Variya Ahmedabad. Arhum Elegans Aec Cross Road City Naranpura Vistar So Ahmedabad. Pan : Amwpv 5380 Q (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09 /10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 144 and centralized communications were also issued from time to time, but no response was forthcoming from the assessee. 2.2 On examination of the return filed, it was observed that the assessee had disclosed sale consideration aggregating to Rs. 8,67,82,806/- in the schedule of capital gains along with TDS

I- SERVE SYSTEM PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 144 of the Act to the best of his judgement on the basis of material available on record. In the assessment so completed vide order dated 21.01.2013, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1,59,41,190/-, after making the disallowance of Rs.69,23,010/- being the 25% of the expenses claimed

NIRMA LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCTI , CIRCLE-3(1)(1) NOW DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nirma Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-380 009 Circle-3(1)(1), Pan : Aaacn 5350 K Ahmedabad-380009 अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09.10.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 10.04.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee Is As Follows:-

144, it is only on the date the assessment is made that the deeming fiction contained under section 244A(2) comes 11 Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT AY : 2013-14 into play and the self-assessment tax is deemed to have been paid towards the regular assessment. It is, therefore, on the date of the regular assessment that the self-assessment

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

144, that is, after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered. Further, section 145(1) is an enabling provision. It is intended to enable the Assessing Officer to make the correct assessment which is the paramount object. It is not intended to confer any right or benefit upon an erring assessee. Thus, this section is intended

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

144, that is, after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered. Further, section 145(1) is an enabling provision. It is intended to enable the Assessing Officer to make the correct assessment which is the paramount object. It is not intended to confer any right or benefit upon an erring assessee. Thus, this section is intended

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

144, that is, after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered. Further, section 145(1) is an enabling provision. It is intended to enable the Assessing Officer to make the correct assessment which is the paramount object. It is not intended to confer any right or benefit upon an erring assessee. Thus, this section is intended