VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming

ITO (E) WARD 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ACHARYA SHRI VIJAY SURENDRA SURISHWARJI JAIN TATWA GYAN SHALA, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condoned the delay in filing of appeal. ITO(E) vs. Acharya Shri Vijay Surendra Surishwarji Jain Tatwa Gyan Shala Asst. Year –2018-19 - 3– 5. At the appellate stage before the CIT(A), the assessee placed various evidences on record explaining both the time deposits as well as the interest income. The evidences included detailed bank statements, ledger accounts