BIREN DHIRAJLAL SHAH,GANDHINAGAR vs. CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No: 194/Ahd/2021 &\nITA No: 190/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year: 2008-09\nBiren Dhirajlal Shah\nPlot No. 441-1, Sector-22\nNr. Police Chowkey,\nGandhinagar-382021\nPAN: ACSPS5653F\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. &\nMs. Krupa Panchal, CA\nRevenue Represented:\nDate of hearing\nDate of pronouncement\nShri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R.\n: 19-03-2025\n: 03-04-2025\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-1,\nV

154 Taxman 33 has\nheld as under:\nIt is equally well-settled that where a cause is consciously abandoned (as\nin the present case) the party seeking condonation has to show by cogent\nevidence sufficient cause in support of its claim of condonation. The onus\nis greater. One of the propositions of settled legal position is to ensure\nthat

ASH EDUCATION TRUST,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 8. In the instant case, we observe that admittedly there was a delay of four years in filing of Form 10B by the assessee trust. It was on this basis ITA Nos. 1830&1831/Ahd/2024 Ash Education Trust vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2013-14 & 2014-15 - 5– that

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.

154 Taxman 33 has held as under: It is equally well-settled that where a cause is consciously abandoned (as in the present case) the party seeking condonation has to show by cogent evidence sufficient cause in support of its claim of condonation. The onus is greater. One of the propositions of settled legal position is to ensure that

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

7. In the case of S.S.M. Ahmed Hussain v. ITO [2017] 85 taxmann.com 351 (Madras), the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) along with an application for condonation of delay of 175 days. The assessee claimed that delay occurred since he was waiting outcome of penalty order. The Commissioner (Appeals) however refused to condone the delay. The ITAT

ASH EDUCATION TRUST,MEHSANA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

154 of the Act, so as\nto call for any interference. However, on going through the facts of the\ncase, we are of the considered view that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is\nerroneous on various counts.\n8.1 Firstly, it is a well settled law that delay in filing of Form 10B is a\nprocedural default

SHREE NITYANANDSWAMI EDUCATION TRUST,DHARMAJ TARAPUR ROAD NAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DCIT (EXEMPTION) AHMEDBAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 154 passed by the Assessing Officer was not communicated as a formal order but only in the form of “issue letter”, the communication was not correctly understood by the assessee, which had led to delay in filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. further explained that the assessee had also filed an application

RADHE FINSEC INDIA LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 17 was an appeal against the original order of assessment under the Act, which was passed about 20 years ago, as it was evident that the appeal was against an order of rejection of relief by the I.T.A No. 506/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 7 Radhe Finsec India Ltd. vs. ITO assessing authority. Thus, though the Tribunal

CAT COSMETICS AND HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

section 17 was an appeal against the original order of assessment under the Act, which was passed about 20 years ago, as it was evident that the appeal was against an order of rejection of relief by the I.T.A No. 1189/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 6 CAT Cosmetics And Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO assessing authority. Thus, though

SHIKSHA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

7 Shiksha Foundation vs. ITO discretionary powers to condone such delay. Accordingly, the Gujarat High Court directed that the order of rectification under section 154

ASSOCIATION OF INDIA PANELBOARD MANUFACTURER,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CPC , BENGLURU

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

154 of the Act, wherein Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28.08.2020 condoned the delay and thereby allowed the appeal and the exemption u/s. 11 of the Act was granted to the assessee. The Ld. Senior Counsel also submitted the condition to file Form 10B along with the Return of Income is directory in nature and failure to file such

SHRI DILIP KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 7.2.2013 and this application has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A). Against that order present appeal in ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017 is directed. 3. Registry has pointed that all appeals of the assessee are time barred by 1578 days except ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017. In order to explain delay

SHRI MANISH KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 7.2.2013 and this application has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A). Against that order present appeal in ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017 is directed. 3. Registry has pointed that all appeals of the assessee are time barred by 1578 days except ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017. In order to explain delay

SHRI DILIP KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 7.2.2013 and this application has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A). Against that order present appeal in ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017 is directed. 3. Registry has pointed that all appeals of the assessee are time barred by 1578 days except ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017. In order to explain delay

SHRI PINAKIN KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 7.2.2013 and this application has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A). Against that order present appeal in ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017 is directed. 3. Registry has pointed that all appeals of the assessee are time barred by 1578 days except ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017. In order to explain delay

SHRI PINAKIN KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 7.2.2013 and this application has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A). Against that order present appeal in ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017 is directed. 3. Registry has pointed that all appeals of the assessee are time barred by 1578 days except ITA No.2084/Ahd/2017. In order to explain delay

SHRI MAHESH P. GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-10,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1022 To 1025/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: (1992-1993 To 1995-1996) Shri Mahesh P. Gandhi, A.C.I.T., D-404, 5Th Floor, Vs. Circle-10, Dharnidhar Tower, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad.

154 of Rs.49,930/-) has been made by the Id.AO and therefore the AO is directed delete the said additions, while computing the total income. 4. The Id.AO is to be directed to compute the correct amount of interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act, on the last assessed income. 5. That the appellant craves liberty

PINKAL SURESHKUMAR KOTHARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1303/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ Pinkal Sureshkumar Income Tax Officer Kothari Ward-5(2)(1), Vs. 4, Nemrajul Flat, Ahmedabad Navavikas Gruh Road, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat – 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amlpk3944L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Parth Mehta, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr

section 154 may not extend to matters ITA No.1303/Ahd/2025 [Pinkal Sureshkumar Kothari vs. ITO] A.Y. 2017-18 - 3 – involving incorrect appreciation of facts, non-verification of daywise cashbook and denial of natural justice, and that the appropriate remedy lies in preferring an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal 7. Appellant herewith approaches Hon'ble Tribunal to kindly condone the delay

SHREE HARSANIJI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), PALANPUR

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Harsaniji Public Charitable Trust Ito (Exemption) 32, Shiv Society Part-2 Vs Palanpur. Nr.B.K. Cinema Mehsana 384 002. Pan : Aaats 7750 B.

154-petition to rectify the mistake and grant deduction under section 11(2) of the Act. The assessee also pleaded that filing of Form No.10 along with return of income became mandatory w.e.f. 1.4.2016 i.e. for the Asst.Year 2016-17 whereas the assessment year involved herein is A.Y.2015-16. The delay in filing Form No.10 may be condoned under section