VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground No.7 raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year:2009-10 Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd., The Acit, Circle-8, 301 Sheel Complex, 4 Mayur Colony, Vs Ahmebada. Nr. Mithakhali Six Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan :Aaacv 2354 D (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate Revenue By : Shria. P. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 29/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

234C is unjustified. Initiation of penalty u/s, 271(1)(c) of the Act is unjustified. 9. Initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 3.The appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2009-10, is barred by limitation by 1484 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to 3 condone the delay

SNEHA PAWAN AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "253(3)", "250", "69A", "115BBE", "271(1)(b)", "271(1)(c)", "234B", "148", "142(1)", "234A", "234C" ], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeals is liable to be condoned

VOLARK LEASING IFSC PVT. LTD,GUJARAT vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

234C under the facts & in law in the circumstances of the case. 5. The appellant craves leave to amend, delete or add any grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. The solitary issue in the present appeal relates to denial of deduction to profits earned by the assessee under Section 80LA

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)

234C & 234D of the Act as applicable after giving credit for taxes paid by the assessee. Relevant to mention that before the DPO, Panel-2, Mumbai, the assessee on 12.02.2021 by way of additional ground challenged the validity of the TPO’s order being barred by limitation. The case of the assessee before the Hon’ble DRP is this that

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

delay in filing the Income Tax Return for AY 2019-20 had already been condoned by the competent authority, a fact which directly impacts the eligibility of the Appellant for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. 8. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the grounds of appeal related to exemption under section

SNEHA PAWAN AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

sections": [ "147", "144", "144B", "250", "253(3)", "253(5)", "148", "142(1)", "69A", "115BBE", "271(1)(b)", "271(1)(c)", "234B", "234A", "234C" ], "issues": "Whether the appeals filed by the assessee are to be admitted for adjudication on merits after condoning the delay

MIKAL BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL,PETLAD vs. I.T.O WARD 1(3)(1), PETLAD, PETLAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

234C was held to be consequential and mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 4– Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Special Bench in Motorola Inc. v. DCIT

MIKAL BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL,PETLAD vs. I.T.O WARD 1(3)(1), PETLAD, PETLAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

234C was held to be consequential and mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 4– Supreme Court in CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Special Bench in Motorola Inc. v. DCIT

SINGULARITY LABS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2019-2020 Singularity Labs Private Limited Ito, Ward-4(1)(1) A Wing, Unit No.105 Vs. Ahmedabad- 380 Building No.1-A, Aqualine Properties 015. Pvt.Ltd. It/Ites Sez, Koba Gandhinagar – 382 421 Pan : Aaycs 8711 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Assessee By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am:

delay in filing such reports rests only with the jurisdictional Commissioner of Income Tax, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, or Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, and not with the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). The assessee was advised to approach the competent authority for condonation. The grounds relating to levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C

AYUSH PAVANKUMAR AGRAWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

sections": [ "250", "143(2)", "143(3)", "68", "69C", "133(6)", "271AAC", "234B", "234C", "253(5)" ], "issues": "Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte without adjudication on merits, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned

PRADIPSINH GHANSHYAMSINH VAGHELA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

section 56 is not applicable and hence the addition should be deleted. 12. The whole assessment proceeding is with bad intention and based on the wrong presumptions and assumptions. 13. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has grossly erred in making addition. ITA No.325/Ahd/2025 [Pradipsinh Ghanshyamsinh Vaghela

LAXMANJI KHODAJI SOLANKI (THAKOR),GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 115BBE of\nthe Act.\n\n8. Charging of Interest u/s 234A,234B,234C & 234D are\nunjustified.\n\n9. Initiation of penalty u/s 271F is unjustified.\n\n10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC is unjustified.\"\n\n5. The appeal is filed belatedly before us by a delay of 198\ndays. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that

AGNEE GAS AGENCY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1604/Ahd/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18\nAgnee Gas Agency\n13, Sukhram Chambers\nKhodiarnagar Char Rasta\nBapunagar\nAhmedabad - 380 024\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAHFA 7561 M\nThe Income Tax Officer\nबनाम /\nWard-5(3)(3)\nv/s.\nAhmedabad\nअपीलार्थी/ (Appellant)\nप्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)\nAssessee by:\nHardik Vora office\nRevenue by:\nShri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR\nसुनवाई क

delay is condoned.\nFacts of the case:\n3. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of LPG gas\nagency. It filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017–18 on 30.10.2017, declaring\na total income of Rs.4,01,560/-, which was processed under section 143(1) of\nthe Act. The books of account of the assessee were

NIDHIBEN MRUGESHKUMAR SHAH,ANAND vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

delay of 32 days in filing the appeal is condoned\nand the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.\n3.\nFacts of the Case\n3.1 The Assessing Officer (AO) received information that the\nassessee was maintaining a savings bank account with Karur Vysya\nBank, Anand, and had not filed her return of income despite having\nincome above the taxable limit

KETAN PRIYAVADAN SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-2021 Ketan Priyavadan Shah The Ito, Ward-1(2)(3) 6, Vidyanagar Co-Op Hsg. Society Vs. Vejalpur Ashram Road, Usmanpura Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan : Afgps 3703 K (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parin Shah, Ar Assessee By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025

section 234A, 234B and 234C are unjustified. 4. During the course of hearing before us the Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the delay of 114 days occurred due to bona fide reasons. The assessment order was not received physically or through portal intimation in time, as departmental communications went to the spam folder of the assessee’s registered

DE vs. THAN TRUST,VADODARAVS.THE ITO, WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

234C are unjustified.” Devsthan Trust vs. ITO Asst.Year–2016-17 3. The assessee is a trust and registered under Section 12A of the Act. At the time of filing return of income on 13.09.2016 the assessee claimed benefit under Section 11 and 12 of the Act. However, the assessee did not file Form 10B within the prescribed time

RUSHABH RAMESHBHAI PRAJAPATI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

condone the delay of 124 & 72 days in the filing of both the present appeals. The assessee had adduced sufficient cause for the delay, the same being attributed to uncontroverted fact of the notices of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) as also the order passed being served on the wrong email ID of the assessee. 7. We shall first

RUSHABH RAMESHBHAI PRAJAPATI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

condone the delay of 124 & 72 days in the filing of both the present appeals. The assessee had adduced sufficient cause for the delay, the same being attributed to uncontroverted fact of the notices of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) as also the order passed being served on the wrong email ID of the assessee. 7. We shall first