MALPUR TALUKA PRIMARY TEACHERS SAHKARI SAKH & GRAHAK SAHKARI MANDLI,MALPUR vs. THE ACIT., HIMATNAGAR CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year : 2018-19 Malpur Taluka Primary Acit, Himatnagar Circle Teachers Sahkari Sakh & Vs Himatnagar. Grahak Sahkari Mandali, Malpur, Dist. Aralli Malpur 383 345. Pan : Aacat 9023 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Assessee By : Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

246 days, however, the ld.CIT(A) did not condone this delay, citing the failure of the assessee to provide a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. 7. As could be seen from the record, the assessment order was passed under section

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)

condone delay petitions. Since the Division Bench of this Court has already considered the very same issue, that has been raised in this writ petition, the benefit granted to those petitioners must also enure to the benefit of this writ petitioner also. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 01.11.2019 is hereby quashed on the ground that the same is barred

NUTAN SHIKSHAN SADHANA TRUST ,VADODARA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), AHEMDABAD

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

Section 80G\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act).\n2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:\n“On the facts in the circumstances of your appellant case and in law,\nthe rejection of application MY BOG by CIT (EXEMPTION)\nAHEMDABAD due to not non satisfaction of genuineness of the\nactivities

YUDO HOT RUNNERS INDIA PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER,NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 271(10(c) of the Act should not have been imposed. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order, Penalty Order and the Order of the order of the CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. There is a delay of 246 days in filing the present appeal

RAJESH AMARSINH PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

246, 141, 311(2), 300(A), 365(29) of the Indian Constitution? Whether the CIT(A) was correct in law in grossly dismissing the appeal without considering the facts and merits of the case and not paying due consideration to the contentions of the Appellant and passing appellate order and upholding the illegal addition?” 3. The brief facts

SARDARBHAI RAMSANGBHAI DHULIYA ,PALANPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 PREVIOUSLY WARD-5, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 22-05-2023 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053040290(1)

Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal filed with the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, reads as under:- “[1] The Hon. CIT(A) was grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 20,51,500/- treating the amount as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act though

KHATRI HUNDHARAJ HOTCHAND HUF,PALANPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, PALANPUR, PALANPUR

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

condoning delay of 246 days without deciding on merits.” 3. The return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 was filed by the assessee on 01.11.2017 which was processed under Section

MAHESHPRASAD MURARILAL AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ld. CIT(A) to argue the case on merits.3. Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue has no serious objection in condoning the delay. Recording the same, the delay of 296 days in filing the above appeal is hereby condoned.

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17. I.T.A No. 1823/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No 2 Maheshprasad Murarilal Agarwal vs. ITO 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 296 days in filing the above appeal by the assessee. The assessee filed