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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

135/- from the gross receipts of Rs.32,13,14,003/-]. 5. Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who has taken note of the Supreme Court judgement and direction issued therein in the case of CIT -Vs- AUDA & others in Civil Appeal No 21762 of 2017 called for a remand report from

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

135/- from the gross receipts of Rs.32,13,14,003/-]. 5. Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who has taken note of the Supreme Court judgement and direction issued therein in the case of CIT -Vs- AUDA & others in Civil Appeal No 21762 of 2017 called for a remand report from

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

135/- from the gross receipts of Rs.32,13,14,003/-]. 5. Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who has taken note of the Supreme Court judgement and direction issued therein in the case of CIT -Vs- AUDA & others in Civil Appeal No 21762 of 2017 called for a remand report from

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

135/- from the gross receipts of Rs.32,13,14,003/-]. 5. Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who has taken note of the Supreme Court judgement and direction issued therein in the case of CIT -Vs- AUDA & others in Civil Appeal No 21762 of 2017 called for a remand report from

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

135/- from the gross receipts of Rs.32,13,14,003/-]. 5. Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who has taken note of the Supreme Court judgement and direction issued therein in the case of CIT -Vs- AUDA & others in Civil Appeal No 21762 of 2017 called for a remand report from

NIRAKAR TRUST,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : - Nirakar Trust Cit(Exemption) 11, Anandsagar Apartment Vejalpur Anand Sagar Society Ahmedabad. Jetalpur Road Vadodara 390 007 Pan : Aabtn 8200 G (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Viranch Modi, Ca Assessee By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] and, in consequence, cancelled the earlier provisional approval granted. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, there is a delay of 135

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 17. The ld. A.R further submitted that as regards ground no. 1 (1 to 5), the same is identical to that of the assessee’s case for assessment year 2011-12 and case of Shri Sagar Jhaveri. 18. The ld. D.R. submitted that the issue is identical to that of the case of Sagar Jhaveri and assessee

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 17. The ld. A.R further submitted that as regards ground no. 1 (1 to 5), the same is identical to that of the assessee’s case for assessment year 2011-12 and case of Shri Sagar Jhaveri. 18. The ld. D.R. submitted that the issue is identical to that of the case of Sagar Jhaveri and assessee

AARAV FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 17. The ld. A.R further submitted that as regards ground no. 1 (1 to 5), the same is identical to that of the assessee’s case for assessment year 2011-12 and case of Shri Sagar Jhaveri. 18. The ld. D.R. submitted that the issue is identical to that of the case of Sagar Jhaveri and assessee

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 17. The ld. A.R further submitted that as regards ground no. 1 (1 to 5), the same is identical to that of the assessee’s case for assessment year 2011-12 and case of Shri Sagar Jhaveri. 18. The ld. D.R. submitted that the issue is identical to that of the case of Sagar Jhaveri and assessee

SAROJBEN NATVARBHAI PATEL,CHHOTAUDEPUR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

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

135\n(Gujarat)\n(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: EKAPP 6057 E\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nAssessee by :\nShri Sanket Bakshi, AR\nRevenue by :\nShri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing\n:\n15/10/2025\nघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement:\n29/10/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JM:\nThis appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order

SHREE FOFARIA CHARITABLE FAMILY TRUST,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

delay of 135 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application for approval under section

MANISH N. AMIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years: 2017-18

135 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed a condonation application explaining the reason for delay. It has been stated that the appellate order was communicated on e-mail id and the matter was entrusted by the assessee to his chartered accountant, Manish N. Amin Vs. ITO, AY- 2017-18 2 who was handling the tax matters

BENNET PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

135] condoned delay of one day in uploading the return of income. The facts in this case, the assessee had uploaded its return sometime immediately past midnight on 15.10.2010 i.e. last date of filing return. 8.3 Similarly Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Canadian Speciality Vinyls v. Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 7612/Del/2016 vide order

BENNET PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

135] condoned delay of one day in uploading the return of income. The facts in this case, the assessee had uploaded its return sometime immediately past midnight on 15.10.2010 i.e. last date of filing return. 8.3 Similarly Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Canadian Speciality Vinyls v. Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 7612/Del/2016 vide order

TURAKHIA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.677/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16)

condone the delay. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of decorative veneers and ply- woods and other related products and also dealing in finance & trading in shares and securities since last many years. The assessee filed its return of income on 09/09/2015

SHREE MAHARANI SHANTADEVI TRUST,VADODARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1081/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : - Shree Maharani Shantadevi The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Trust Ahmedabad – 380 015 V/S. C/O. Devsthan Trust Khanderao Mandir R.V. Desai Road Vadodara – 390 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabts 2284 D (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Viranch Modi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

135 days in filing the present appeal. An Affidavit of Trustee of the appellant has been filed for condonation of delay. Shree Maharani Shantadevi Trust vs. CIT(E) 2 Considering the averments made in the affidavit, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3. At the outset, it has been brought to our knowledge that

SHRI ISHWARBHAI V PRAJAPATI,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT, VADODARA-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as unadmitted

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Ishwarbhai V. Prajapati Pr.Cit, Vadodara A-2, Shantipark Society Vs Vadodara. Nr.Amitnagar Char Rasta Vip Road, Karelibaug, Vadodara Pan : Aeapp 0200 M

section 263 of the Act by order dated 2.12.2019 that was the subject matter of appeal pending before the CIT(A), Vadodara, and the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and filed form no.1 and 2 and also paid taxes thereon and intimation of payment in form no.4 also obtained. Assessee has filed copies of form no.1

KAUSHIK D BHAGAT (PATEL),VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2014-15

135. Race Course Circle, Vs. (Gujarat) Vadodara – 390 007. [PAN – ATFPB 9780 J] (Gujarat). (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Parin Shah, CA Revenue by Ms. Urvashi Mandhan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.09.2025 O R D E R PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order