YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, it is noticed

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, it is noticed

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, it is noticed

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, it is noticed

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the threshold, it is noticed

TEJAS KARSHANBHAI DARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 cannot be appealed with. Thereafter, he during one social function I.T.A No. 1459/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 3 Tejus Karshanbhai Dari vs. ITO mat a chartered accountant and being cautious about such a huge demand, assessee has narrated the entire sequence of events to that chartered accountant. The chartered accountant has advised him to file instant appeal against

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

condone the delay. Accordingly, we proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. The assessee in the first ground of CO has challenged the proceedings under section 147

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

condone the delay. Accordingly, we proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. The assessee in the first ground of CO has challenged the proceedings under section 147

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

condone the delay. Accordingly, we proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. The assessee in the first ground of CO has challenged the proceedings under section 147

RABDI VIBHAG PROGRESSIVE KELAVNI MANDAL,VALSAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

delayed by 147 days (approx.), and hence ld CIT(E) rejected application of assessee in Form No.10AB, u/s 80G(5) (iii) of the Act, as not maintainable and also cancelled the provisional approval granted in Form No.10AC, under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80 G of the Act. 17. Therefore, in this ambiguity situation

TIKI TAR INDUSTRIES BARODA LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-2, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2014-15 Tiki Tar Industries Baroda Ltd. Pr.Cit-2 8Th Floor, Neptune Tower Vs Vadodara. Baroda Productivity Council Alkapuri, Vadodara Pan : Aadct 8382 Q

delay in filing the present appeal is accordingly condoned. 8. We shall now proceed to adjudicate the appeal before us on merit. 7 9. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are not in consonance with the Rule 8 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, as they are a blend of descriptive and argumentative contents.In fact,these

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

147 r.w. Explanation 2(d) of the Act. 1.04 On the facts and in circumstances of your appellant's case and in law, ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding that credit entries in alleged foreign bank statements is liable to be treated as deemed income as per section 68 of 69A of the Act though your appellant has not maintained