GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

b), 142(1) and show cause notices under section 144 of the Act, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. 4. In the absence of any response or documentary evidence, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment ex parte under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act on 24.03.2023 and treated cash deposits aggregating

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

b), 142(1) and show cause notices under section 144 of the Act, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. 4. In the absence of any response or documentary evidence, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment ex parte under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act on 24.03.2023 and treated cash deposits aggregating

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

b), 142(1) and show cause notices under section 144 of the Act, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. 4. In the absence of any response or documentary evidence, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment ex parte under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act on 24.03.2023 and treated cash deposits aggregating

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

b), 142(1) and show cause notices under section 144 of the Act, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. 4. In the absence of any response or documentary evidence, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment ex parte under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act on 24.03.2023 and treated cash deposits aggregating

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Trust is registered u/s. 12AA of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee filed its Return of Income on 28.09.2014 declaring total income at NIL after claiming deduction of Rs.18,92,93,630/- under section 11 of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny and the A.O. assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.56

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Trust is registered u/s. 12AA of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee filed its Return of Income on 28.09.2014 declaring total income at NIL after claiming deduction of Rs.18,92,93,630/- under section 11 of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny and the A.O. assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.56

THE ACIT(E),CIRCLE-2 , AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Trust is registered u/s. 12AA of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee filed its Return of Income on 28.09.2014 declaring total income at NIL after claiming deduction of Rs.18,92,93,630/- under section 11 of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny and the A.O. assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.56

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Trust is registered u/s. 12AA of the Act. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee filed its Return of Income on 28.09.2014 declaring total income at NIL after claiming deduction of Rs.18,92,93,630/- under section 11 of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny and the A.O. assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.56

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

271(l)(c). 2. Facts of the case are as emanates from the assessment order: 3. The Baroda Cricket Association is registered trust vide Registration No. F/881/Baroda dated 04.11,1996 with Asstt. Charity Commissioner, Baroda. The assessee trust is registered u/s.!2AA of the I.T. Act vide order EXEMPTION/I 10-23-13/2000-01 dated

DUDHSAGAR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION,MEHSANA vs. THE DCIT(E) CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1048/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dudhsagar Research And Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Development Association, Income Tax (Exemption), C/o. Dudhsagar Dairy, Highway Circle-1, Mehsana, Gujarat-384002 Ahmedabad [PAN No.AAATD1312J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Respondent

PARAG DAVE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) (PREVIOUSLY CIRCLE-3(3)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Makarand V. Mahadeokarassessment Year 2016-17

B) such association, university, college or other institution is specified as such by notification in the Official Gazette, by the Central Government Provided further that where any sum is paid to such association, university, college or other institution in a previous year relevant to the assessment year beginning on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, the deduction under

SHRI MAHESH P. GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-10,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1022 To 1025/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: (1992-1993 To 1995-1996) Shri Mahesh P. Gandhi, A.C.I.T., D-404, 5Th Floor, Vs. Circle-10, Dharnidhar Tower, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad.

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that: “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal is allowed

1,47,98,329/- as an income of the Appellant. 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO in not allowing the benefit of section 11(2) of the Act and thereby treating an amount of Rs.4,50,00,000/- as the income of the Appellant. 9. The learned

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SANJAY KISHANLAL BISHNOI,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

b) & 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 respectively. Shri AYs:2014-15 & 2015-16 Sh. Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi Omprakash and Shri Sanjay have knowingly and intentionally made, signed and fabricated documents as discussed in detail hereinabove, which were presented to the Customs authorities which they knew were false and incorrect in respect of the value of the imported goods

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SANJAY KISHANLAL BISHNOI,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

b) & 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 respectively. Shri AYs:2014-15 & 2015-16 Sh. Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi Omprakash and Shri Sanjay have knowingly and intentionally made, signed and fabricated documents as discussed in detail hereinabove, which were presented to the Customs authorities which they knew were false and incorrect in respect of the value of the imported goods

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

B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ीट".आर. स"थल कुमार,"या"यकसद"यएवं "ीमकरंदवसंतमहादेवकर, लेखासद"यकेसम#। BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER &SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.136/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13) Shri Rushabhdev Swetambar Vs. Income Tax Officer Murtipujak Jain Sangh, (Exemption), Nr. Mirambica School, Naranpura, Ward-2, Ahmedabad-380013 Ahmedabad [PAN No.AAATR2081G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby : Shri Jaimin

MAHESHRAJ CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.791/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 Dcit, Mahesraj Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Vs. 141, Phase Ii, Gidc, Vatva, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382330 Pan:Aabcm0424C

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 wherein it was held as under: Asstt. Year 1999-2000 8 “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under : "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between

THE ITO, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RADIOLOGICAL & IMAGING ASSOCIATION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

B. Parmar, A.R. Date of Hearing 24/08/2018 Date of Pronouncement 15/11/2018 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal has been filed before us by the revenue against the order dated 25.08.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXI, Ahmedabad whereby and where under the penalty of Rs.43,04,800/- imposed

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Mahavir Prasadassessment Year : 2011-12 Ananya Finance For Inclusive The Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Growth P Ltd. Ambawadi 401, Shaan, Op: M.J. Library Ahmedabad 380015. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aahca 8023 D

charitable Trust u/s 12A of the Act, claiming exemption under section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Micro Finance Division (MFD) of FWWB was started three decades back. Indian Foundation For Inclusive Growth (IFIG) is a trust registered under the Documents and Registration Act,1908 ,and was formed on 13-03-2009, out of corpus funds