AARK INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

delayed in terms of the time prescribed u/s 143(2) of the Act. Section 143(2) prescribes the time limit as under:- “143… (2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Assessing Officer or the prescribed income-tax authority, as the case

VINEETSINGH GULABSINGH RORE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

143(3) read with Section 263 and Section 1448 of the Act was passed on 23rd September 2023, making an addition of Rs 5.80,00,000/- under Section 69 of the Act. Reason for Delay: The reason for the delay of 543 days in filing the appeal against the order under Section 263 is due to a lack of proper

ELECTRONICS & QUALITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

3– 139(5) of the Act, again declaring nil income after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. The return was processed by the Assessing Officer, CPC, Bangalore under section 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 04.04.2023, wherein the total income was assessed at ₹10,04,64,687/- and a demand

M/S. WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, BARODA

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3 SCC 545] and Moniben Devraj Shah v. Municipal Corpn.of Brihan Mumbai (2012) 5- SCC 157].)” (b) Ajay Dabre v. Pyare Ram 2023 SCC Online SC 92: ‘13. This Court in the case of Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition Officer while rejecting an application for condonation of delay for lack of sufficient cause has concluded in Paragraph 15 as follows

WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

3 SCC 545] and Moniben Devraj Shah v. Municipal Corpn.of Brihan Mumbai (2012) 5- SCC 157].)” (b) Ajay Dabre v. Pyare Ram 2023 SCC Online SC 92: ‘13. This Court in the case of Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition Officer while rejecting an application for condonation of delay for lack of sufficient cause has concluded in Paragraph 15 as follows

HEALTH FOUNDATION & RESEARCH CENTRE,DAHOD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

condonation of delay had been filed before the jurisdictional Commissioner as contemplated under section 119(2)(b). It was further submitted that the return of the assessee was not processed under section 143(1), and the assessment was completed under section 143(3

AXIS AGRI SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Section under which AO's Order 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) was Passed r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144B Addition on account of rejecting exemption u/s 10(1) and treating 73,72,328 1,39,48,267 1,18,72,706 the income as business income (Rs.) Date of CIT(A)'s Order 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 4. The assessee preferred appeals

AXIS AGRI SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Section under which AO's Order 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) was Passed r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144B Addition on account of rejecting exemption u/s 10(1) and treating 73,72,328 1,39,48,267 1,18,72,706 the income as business income (Rs.) Date of CIT(A)'s Order 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 4. The assessee preferred appeals

AXIS AGRI SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1041/Ahd/2023, 1042/Ahd/2023 & 1043/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Axis Agri Services The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 25, Dada Estate Circle-3(1)(1) V/S. Sarkhej Sanandroad Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 382 210 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavfa 6219 J (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Section under which AO's Order 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) was Passed r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144B Addition on account of rejecting exemption u/s 10(1) and treating 73,72,328 1,39,48,267 1,18,72,706 the income as business income (Rs.) Date of CIT(A)'s Order 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 15/09/2023 4. The assessee preferred appeals

SMT. NEELU SANJAY GUPTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Neelu Sanjay Gupta, The Dy. Cit, Vs. 9Th Floor, Cambay Grand Hotel, Central Circle-2(2), S.G. Highway, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 Pan : Adypg 0351 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Bhati, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.05.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta

delay filed by the assessee. Smt Neelu Sanjay Gupta Vs. DCIT AY : 2013-14 2 3. Before proceeding to deal with the condonation application, it is necessary to bring out a brief background of the case before us. In the impugned case, assessment was framed under Section 143

ELECTRONICS & QUALITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,GANDHINAGAR vs. CPC, BENGALURU CURRENT JURIS. -THE DY.CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ld. Pcit, Which Was Pending Consideration. Therefore Assessee Filed Appeal Before Ld. Cit(A) Which Was Dismissed Stating That The Ld. Cit(A) Does Not Have The Power To Condone The Delay, Thereby Confirmed The Addition Made By Cpc.

section 12AA of the I.T. Act. 3. The solitary issue in this appeal is late filing of Form 10B thereby exemption u/s. 11 of the Act was disallowed while processing the return u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the CPC. The assessee filed condonation of delay

BIREN DHIRAJLAL SHAH,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.192-193/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Shri Biren Dhirajlal Shah, Income Tax Officer, Plot No.441-1, Sector-22, Vs. Ward-1, Nr. Police Chowkey, Gandhinagar. Gandhinagar.

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: ITA no.192-193/AHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12 2 1. The Ld.AO has erred by making order u/s.69, as there are no investments by the assessee. 2. Due to bankruptcy

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground(s) of appeal and also to amend, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 28. The limited issue for consideration for the impugned assessment year is the levy of penalty of Rs. 59,34,456/- under Section