P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

132 of the Act was conducted by Investigation Unit, Mumbai on 27.10.2014 on M/s Navjeevan Charitable Trust. The Trust was notified by the National Committee, Ministry of Finance, Government of India for the purpose of deduction under Section 35AC of the Act. The investigation into the financial transactions of the Trust showed that the Trust had received donations of about

P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

132 of the Act was conducted by Investigation Unit, Mumbai on 27.10.2014 on M/s Navjeevan Charitable Trust. The Trust was notified by the National Committee, Ministry of Finance, Government of India for the purpose of deduction under Section 35AC of the Act. The investigation into the financial transactions of the Trust showed that the Trust had received donations of about

P.M. BHIMANI ORGOCHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

132 of the Act was conducted by Investigation Unit, Mumbai on 27.10.2014 on M/s Navjeevan Charitable Trust. The Trust was notified by the National Committee, Ministry of Finance, Government of India for the purpose of deduction under Section 35AC of the Act. The investigation into the financial transactions of the Trust showed that the Trust had received donations of about

BHIMANI CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1246/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2010-2011 Bhimani Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T. 510, Mahakant Complex, Vs. Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. V.S. Hospital, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aabcb5513H

Charitable Trust which was registered under the provision of section 35AC of the Act. Thus, the assessee claimed the deduction for the amount of donation under the provision of section 35AC of the Act. 4. However, the AO found that there was a search operation u/s 132

INDIAN REDCROSS SOCIETY ANAND DISTRICT BRANCH,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

4– the substantial compliance is required to be made. In the case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) the assessee had produced the audit report after processing the return under Section 143(1). This Court in the said order has observed that the approach of the authority in these type of cases should be equitable, balancing

THE ITO, WARD-1(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DISHMAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and its cross objections are dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Amarjit Sinh

Charitable Trust registered under section 12AA of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer had issued notice pursuant to which the petitioner had given its reply explaining as to why it was entitled to the said deductions. The Assessing Officer after considering the explanation given by the petitioner had passed

DISHMAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and its cross objections are dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Amarjit Sinh

Charitable Trust registered under section 12AA of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer had issued notice pursuant to which the petitioner had given its reply explaining as to why it was entitled to the said deductions. The Assessing Officer after considering the explanation given by the petitioner had passed

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. AHMEDBAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

trust has to be treated as exempt entity during the year under consideration. Therefore, both the appeal of the assessee on this issue against the order of the Assessing I.T.A No. 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 4 Deputy CIT(Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority Officer u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 250 of the Act and against the order

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. AHMEDBAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

trust has to be treated as exempt entity during the year under consideration. Therefore, both the appeal of the assessee on this issue against the order of the Assessing I.T.A No. 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 4 Deputy CIT(Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority Officer u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 250 of the Act and against the order

GURUKRUPA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

132 F Ring Ahmedabad Road, Naranpura, (Respondent) Ahmedabad-380063 PAN: AADTG2349D (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Pamil H. Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.P. Makwana, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 20-02-2025 Date of pronouncement : 06-03-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated

GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KHANJI BHAVAN vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN(VEJALPUR), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21

132 Ft. Ring Road Ahmedabad. B/h. Gandhi Labour Institute Ahmedabad 380 052. PAN : AAACG 7987 P (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate Assessee by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Revenue by सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 04/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

132 Ft. Ring Road, Ahmedabad [PAN No.:AAATG1304R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel & Shri Rushin Patel, Ars Respondent by: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 18.07.2025 O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two appeals are filed by the Assessee as against separate

GMDC SCIENCE & RESEARCH CENTRE,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Allowed for Statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

132 Ft. Ring Road, Ahmedabad [PAN No.:AAATG1304R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Jimi Patel & Shri Rushin Patel, Ars Respondent by: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 18.07.2025 O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two appeals are filed by the Assessee as against separate

SHALBY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years: 2020-21

132 of the Act, was conducted on political parties and charitable organisation groups in March 2021 and AISECT was also covered in the search action. It was found that this assessee was engaged in bogus donation scheme. The donations received through banking channels used to be returned back after charging a commission. Therefore, the donation of Rs. 3 crores made

SAKAR HEALTHCARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: us in both the appeals and for the sake of convenience we are reproducing grounds raised in ITA No.1172/Ahd/2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2020-21:

132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of "Political Parties and Charitable Organizations Group". The search operation covered mainly 3 registered unrecognized Political Parties namely Manvadhikar National Party (MNP), Kisan Adhikar Party (KAP) and Kisan Party of India (KPI) alongwith 2 charitable Organization namely All India Social Education Charitable Trust (AISEC) and Aadhar Foundation

SAKAR HEALTHCARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of "Political Parties and Charitable Organizations Group". The search operation covered mainly 3 registered unrecognized Political Parties namely Manvadhikar National Party (MNP), Kisan Adhikar Party (KAP) and Kisan Party of India (KPI) alongwith 2 charitable Organization namely All India Social Education Charitable Trust (AISEC) and Aadhar Foundation

SHRIMAD BUDDHISAGAR MISSION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.Ta. No.2093/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: Na) Shrimad Buddhisagar Mission Vs. The Commissioner Of Trust, Income Tax(Exemption) A 601 Parshwa Tower, Ahmedabad. 132 Ft Ring Road, Nr Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite-380015. [Pan No.Aauts0258G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri Sarju Mehta, Ar Respondent By: Shri V Nandakumar, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.03.2025 O R D E R

132 Ft Ring Road, Nr Shyamal Cross Road, Satellite-380015. [PAN No.AAUTS0258G] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Sarju Mehta, AR Respondent by: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT.DR Date of Hearing 13.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.03.2025 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed

GUJARAT KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

4– 6. The principles governing condonation of delay are well settled. The expression “sufficient cause” in section 5 of the Limitation Act is to be construed liberally so as to advance substantial justice. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of G. Ramegowda, Major & Ors. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore (1988) 2 SCC 142 has held that

SUNIL PIYUSH SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. -THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

section 244A, as the demand giving rise to such payments is unlawful. I.T.A No. 1917/Ahd/2025 Sunil Piyush Shah, A.Y. 2019-20 8. That the orders of the learned AO and learned CIT(A) are arbitrary, contrary to facts and law, violative of the principles of equity, fairness, and natural justice, and hence liable to be quashed in their entirety