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.

delay in filing Form 10B was due to inadvertent oversight of CA, same was to be condoned by authority concerned under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. 13. In the case of Brahmchari Wadi Trust vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) [2025] 173

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

173/- C. Capital Gain – [as per Return of income] Rs. 11,37,32,825/- D. Income from other sources [as per Return of income] Rs. 80,07,21,966/- Assessed Income Rs. 18,07,02,90,489/- Brought forward losses of Rs. 2,41,44,65,028/- Rs. Nil for A.Y. 2013-14 Adjusted fully by the Dept. while passing

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD, VADODARA. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

condoned and the exemption under section 11 allowed. 13. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative (“DR”) supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) in its entirety. 14. We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the material placed on record, and duly examined the orders of the lower authorities. The undisputed facts are that the assessee, a State

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

173 taxmann.com 54 (Gujarat) [17-03-2025], the Gujarat High Court held that where delay in filing Form No. 10 by assessee-trust had occurred due to internal Gujarat Technological University vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –2017-18 - 4– administrative problems of assessee-trust, since assessee-trust for past many years had substantially satisfied conditions for claiming exemption under Section

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

173 Rajkot Construction Ltd. 3. Patel 627/Rjt/2014 Rajkot Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 4. Rajkamal 118/ahd/2009 & Ahmedabad Builders Others Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 6. The issue involved in the C.O. filed by the assessee is with respect to disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 26,719/- by the AO which disallowance stood confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has claimed transaction

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

173 Rajkot Construction Ltd. 3. Patel 627/Rjt/2014 Rajkot Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 4. Rajkamal 118/ahd/2009 & Ahmedabad Builders Others Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 6. The issue involved in the C.O. filed by the assessee is with respect to disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 26,719/- by the AO which disallowance stood confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has claimed transaction

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

173 Rajkot Construction Ltd. 3. Patel 627/Rjt/2014 Rajkot Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 4. Rajkamal 118/ahd/2009 & Ahmedabad Builders Others Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 6. The issue involved in the C.O. filed by the assessee is with respect to disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 26,719/- by the AO which disallowance stood confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has claimed transaction

SHRI MAHAVIR GOPALAN CHARITABLE TRUST,KAPADVANJ vs. THE ITO(EXEMPTIONS) BHAVNAGAR PRESENTLY THE ITO (EXEMPTION), VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

condoning the delay in filing of\nthe said option. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has progressed to\nthe denial of the claim of the assessee for a completely\ndifferent reason as that adopted by the AO for doing so\nwithout mentioning the reasons for rejecting the AO's basis\nand adopting a different basis.\n8.\nSurprisingly, thereafter, the Ld.CIT

DIVERSIFIED SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

condoning the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal. 3. Now on merits, the brief facts of the case are that the assessee firm is engaged in providing manpower to different clients. The assessee filed its income tax return for assessment year 2019-20 under section 139(1) electronically declaring the total income of " 56,640/-. The return

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1337/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gujarat Technological Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ University Income Tax Circle-1 V/S. Nr.Vishwakarma Exemptions, Govt.Engg.College Ahmedabad – 380 015 Nr.Visar Three Roads Chandkheda Society Area So Ahmedabad – 382 424 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg 1109 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

section 11. In the absence of any change in facts or law, we are bound by the said decision for the present assessment year. Gujarat Technological University vs. Dy.CIT-1 Exemptions Asst. Year : 2018-19 3 17. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Brahmchari Wadi Trust D. CIT(E) [2025] 173 taxmann.com 54 (Guj.), Shri Parshwanath Bhakti Vihar Jain

SHREE JAGVALLABH PARSHWANATH BHATHA GHAR TRUST,PALDI, AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

173 days in filing the two appeals. The assessee had filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It is stated that there was delayed communication and improper guidance on the part of the consultant of the assessee which led to delay in filing this appeal. It was explained that the matter was subsequently referred

SHREE JAGVALLABH PARSHWANATH BHATHA GHAR TRUST,PALDI, AHMEDABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

173 days in filing the two appeals. The assessee had filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It is stated that there was delayed communication and improper guidance on the part of the consultant of the assessee which led to delay in filing this appeal. It was explained that the matter was subsequently referred

EXPRESS CARGO CARRIERS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 40(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the extent of Rs.1,01,35,590/-, disallowance out of freight expenses of Rs.6,19,889/- and disallowance of local freight charges and crossing cut freight charges amounting to Rs.21,38,173/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Delay Condoned These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders dated 20.11.2024 and 28.10.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”], under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) relating to the Assessment Years

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Delay Condoned These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders dated 20.11.2024 and 28.10.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”], under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) relating to the Assessment Years

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICAL LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.

delay is hereby being condoned. 4. On merits, the brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceutical products. During the year, revised return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act was filed by the assessee company on 28-03-2019. The assessee company received intimation

HYDERABAD YADGIRI TOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 on 11.10.2018 declaring total loss of Rs.37,84,22,186/-. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 28.01.2021 at the returned loss. Subsequently, the case

DEVENDERSINGH SAJUBHAI JADEJA,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1),, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 464/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Devendersingh Sajubhai Jadeja, Income Tax Officer, C/101, Baroda Skyz, Vs. Ward-1(2)(1), Opp. Adarsh Duplex, Vadodara. Gorwa Road, Vadodara-390022. Pan: Aelpj2883F

delay of 12 days which is prayed to be condoned. 6. On the facts, no such addition ought to have been made. 7. The assessee craves leave to add, to alter and/or to modify any grounds of appeal. 3. The assessee in ground No. 1 has challenged the validity of the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section