THAKORBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3(1)(1), VADODARA

nature of receipt. The counsel\ncontended that no addition under section 69A was permissible when the\nsource of cash was explained as sale consideration of land, relying upon\nseveral Tribunal and High Court decisions. On the timing of taxability, the\ncounsel submitted that the sale could not be said to have taken place in A.Y.\n2008-09. It was argued

RAVINDRABHAI SHANKARBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5) NOW ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Ito Ravindrabhai Shankarbhai Vs. Ward-1(2)(5). Patel Now Ito, Ward-1(2)(2) 86,Kanha Residency Vadodara – 390 007 Kalali Road, Kalali Ahmedabad – 390 012 [Pan : Aigpp 8415 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Assessee Represented By : Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue Represented By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

capital gains, which has been decided against the assessee by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 10.1. On a careful consideration of the entire material placed before us, we find that during the course of proceedings before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed certain additional documents, including bank confirmations, certificates from third parties, death

SHAILESH S. JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in failing to consider the fact that there is no averment of either SCS or his employees in their statements that SCS is providing share trading loss entry to clients by resorting to synchronized trading using the infrastructure of companies controlled

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in failing to consider the fact that there is no averment of either SCS or his employees in their statements that SCS is providing share trading loss entry to clients by resorting to synchronized trading using the infrastructure of companies controlled

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in failing to consider the fact that there is no averment of either SCS or his employees in their statements that SCS is providing share trading loss entry to clients by resorting to synchronized trading using the infrastructure of companies controlled

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ROHITJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

justice, the delay in filing of the present appeal may be condoned. 4. In the result, we are hereby condoning the delay in filing of the present appeals. We shall first take up ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 in the case of Shri Rohit C. Thakore for A.Y. 2011-12 5. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

HEMANTKUMAR MANSUKHLAL SONI, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Hemantkumar Mansukhlal Soni, Huf Ito, Ward-1(3)(1) 2254 Mahurat Pole Vs Ahmedabad. Manekchowk Ahmedabad-380001. Pan : Aabhh 1182 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar & Shri Samir Vora, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Guptathis Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 27.04.203 15.3.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal Are As Under:

capital gain on sale of shares of Monotype India Ltd. was not genuine and thereby upholding the addition of Rs.59,93,278/- as unexplained credit u/s 68 made by A.O. is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice

RAMSINHJI MERAJI VANZARA,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

capital gains tax. 5. The learned CIT(A) has passed the appellate order in breach of natural justice by not granting

JAYESHKUMAR BALDEVBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

natural justice. Therefore, the appellant shall be granted opportunity to produce additional evidences. 2.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding the reopening u/s 147 of the Act. 2.2 That in the facts and/or in the law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the reopening

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the issue\nto the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo consideration. The Assessing\nOfficer is directed to refer the valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 to\nthe Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) as per the specific request of the\nassessee, and thereafter, re-compute the Long-Term Capital Gain after giving\ndue