SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

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

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

2 explaining the reasons for such delay. Since the contents and circumstances narrated therein are identical for all the years, they are being considered together. 2.2 In the affidavit, the assessee has deposed that the delay occurred due to ignorance of legal proceedings and misinterpretation of law, coupled with a communication gap arising from incorrect email address recorded with

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

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

2 explaining the reasons for such delay. Since the contents and circumstances narrated therein are identical for all the years, they are being considered together. 2.2 In the affidavit, the assessee has deposed that the delay occurred due to ignorance of legal proceedings and misinterpretation of law, coupled with a communication gap arising from incorrect email address recorded with

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

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

2 explaining the reasons for such delay. Since the contents and circumstances narrated therein are identical for all the years, they are being considered together. 2.2 In the affidavit, the assessee has deposed that the delay occurred due to ignorance of legal proceedings and misinterpretation of law, coupled with a communication gap arising from incorrect email address recorded with

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

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

2 explaining the reasons for such delay. Since the contents and circumstances narrated therein are identical for all the years, they are being considered together. 2.2 In the affidavit, the assessee has deposed that the delay occurred due to ignorance of legal proceedings and misinterpretation of law, coupled with a communication gap arising from incorrect email address recorded with

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

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

2 explaining the reasons for such delay. Since the contents and circumstances narrated therein are identical for all the years, they are being considered together. 2.2 In the affidavit, the assessee has deposed that the delay occurred due to ignorance of legal proceedings and misinterpretation of law, coupled with a communication gap arising from incorrect email address recorded with

SMT. VANITA VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2010-11 Smt. Vanita Vaswani, The Pcit (Central), 2, Samprat Co-Op. Housing Vs Ahmedabad Society Limited, Opp. Rivera, 11, Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad - 380015 Pan : Aakpv 7868 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, Ar & Shri Vijay Govani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Virendra Ojha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/09/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad Dated 28.03.2021, Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Assessee Has Taken 7 Grounds Of Appeal Which Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Pcit (Central), Ahmedabad ("The Pcit") Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Invoking Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") & Has Further Erred In Directing The Ld. Ao To Pass Fresh Assessment Order Incorporating The Market Value Of The Property As Per Section 50C Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Pcit Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In The Case Of The Appellant In Failing To Take Smt. Vanita Vaswani Vs. Pr. Cit Ay : 2010-2011 2

151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— Smt. Vanita Vaswani Vs. Pr. CIT AY : 2010-2011 8 (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, ~ belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, or any information contained therein, a person other than the person referred

ARUNA KISHORE FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

2. The registry noted the delay in filing appeal before us in case of ITA No. 323 and 324/Ahd/2025. Therefore, before proceeding to adjudicate the appeals on merits, it is pertinent to consider the applications filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay in filing both the appeals before us. In ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025, the appeal has been filed against

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

2. The registry noted the delay in filing appeal before us in case of ITA No. 323 and 324/Ahd/2025. Therefore, before proceeding to adjudicate the appeals on merits, it is pertinent to consider the applications filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay in filing both the appeals before us. In ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025, the appeal has been filed against

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

2. The registry noted the delay in filing appeal before us in case of ITA No. 323 and 324/Ahd/2025. Therefore, before proceeding to adjudicate the appeals on merits, it is pertinent to consider the applications filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay in filing both the appeals before us. In ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025, the appeal has been filed against

ARUNA KISHOR FOUNDATION,VADODARA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

2. The registry noted the delay in filing appeal before us in case of ITA No. 323 and 324/Ahd/2025. Therefore, before proceeding to adjudicate the appeals on merits, it is pertinent to consider the applications filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay in filing both the appeals before us. In ITA No. 323/Ahd/2025, the appeal has been filed against

THE DCIT,(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. MIDVALLEY HEALTHCARE SERVICES PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

condone the delay in filing the CO of the assessee. Hence, we admit the CO filed by the assessee and proceed to decide the issue on merit. 28. The first issue raised by the assessee in ground no-1 of its cross objection is that the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the alternate claim for deduction under section

PARVINBANU MAYUDIN KAZI,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (PREVIOUSLY WARD-5), ANAND

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2011-12 Parvinbanu Mayudin Kazi Ito, Ward-1 50/51, Sabnam Society Vs. Anand. Nr. New Water Tank Anand, Gujarat. Pan : Awppk 5536 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Assessee By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.05.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”], For A.Y. 2011–12, Confirming The Addition Of Rs.9,81,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 69A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, In Respect Of Cash Deposits In Her Savings Bank Account Vide His Order Dated 26.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act.

2 is a lady belonging to a modest background with limited awareness of legal procedures. She had entrusted the handling of her appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC, to her erstwhile tax consultant, under the bonafide belief that the matter was being properly attended to. She did not receive any communication or update regarding the progress or outcome

CHIRAG PATEL,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO),WARD -3(1)(1), VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

2. Unjustified Ex Partee Assessment under Section 144 The assessment under Section 144 was conducted without considering the genuine сircumstances surrounding the appellant's financial status. The appellant was unemployed during the relevant financial year (2011-12) and had no independent source of income. The bank account in question was operated by an agent named Minesh Patel for the purpose