ITO, WARD-3(3)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI HEMANT HIRALAL SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and CO of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Cross Objection No.174/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year :2014-15 Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) Shri Hemant Hiralal Shah Ahmedabad. Vs 112, Devang Apartment, Opp: Patel Hospital Nehru Park Vastrapur Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Abjps 1499 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr Assessee By : Shri Karan Shah, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 15.01.2018 Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 7, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] Relating To The Asst.Year 2014- 15. 2. Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Has A Delay Of 111 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit Stating That He Was Away From Usa During The Period 12.5.2019 & 05.07.2019 When Form No.36 Filed By The Revenue Was Served On Him At His Address. The Form No.36

condoning the delay. 3. 4. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual drawing salary from partnership firm viz. Monarch Infra Venture and showing income from capital gain and income from other sources. For the Asst.Year 2014-15, the assessee filed his return of income on 29.3.2016 declaring total income at Rs.2,21,880/-. The return

RAYMON PATEL GELATINE PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(2),, BARODA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Mrs.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Kamble

condone the delay. The order was pronounced in the Open Court and hearing of the appeal is being proceeded with. 6. The facts of the present case are that regular assessment under section 143(3) was framed on the assessee for the impugned year on 24.12.2007 determining total income at Rs.16,20,928/-. Thereafter the case of the assessee

RAYMON PATEL GELATINE PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(2),, BARODA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Mrs.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Kamble

condone the delay. The order was pronounced in the Open Court and hearing of the appeal is being proceeded with. 6. The facts of the present case are that regular assessment under section 143(3) was framed on the assessee for the impugned year on 24.12.2007 determining total income at Rs.16,20,928/-. Thereafter the case of the assessee

BHAGWANDAS DETARAM RAIMALANI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

1 The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in passing the order without hearing on merits, such addition is requested to be deleted. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.28,65,935/- made on account of understating the cost of project, such addition is requested to be deleted

VEN SINGH,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, MEHSANA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the above terms

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Ven Singh Ito, Ward-3 Rabari Colony Vs Mehsana. Opp: Torrent Pharma Ahmedabad-Mehsana Highway Chhatral 382729 Gujarat. Pan : Bewps 6333 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Jimi Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/11/2024

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal of the assessee has been filed late by 8 days. The assessee has submitted that due to some personal circumstances, there was a delay on his part in signing his appeal, which

SHRI ARUN RAMANLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

256/- which consists of Rs.18,718/- being land revenue under Section 43B of Rs.7,89,538/- being PF/ESI late deposited under Section 36(i)(va) of the Act. Against the intimation the assessee filed rectification under Section 154 of the Act and while processing the application under Section 154 the addition of Rs.18,718/- under Section 43B was deleted whereas

FLAVAROMA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), 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)

1)(b) of the Act on 04-03-2024 however denied final registration for application filed u/s. 80G(5) of the Act as the same was filed beyond the time limit prescribed under the Act and there is no power to condone the delay in filing Form No. 10AB by the Ld. CIT(E) thereby rejected the application

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

delay of 40 days in filing the appeals is\nsupported by reasonable cause. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the\ndelay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.\nFacts of the case\n4. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in software-related\nservices. In all years under consideration, the assessments were reopened\nunder section

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

delay of 40 days in filing the appeals is\nsupported by reasonable cause. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the\ndelay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.\nFacts of the case\n4. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in software-related\nservices. In all years under consideration, the assessments were reopened\nunder Section

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

delay of 40 days in filing the appeals is\nsupported by reasonable cause. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the\ndelay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.\nFacts of the case\n4.\nThe assessee is a private limited company engaged in software-related\nservices. In all years under consideration, the assessments were reopened\nunder section

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

delay of 40 days in filing the appeals is\nsupported by reasonable cause. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the\ndelay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits.\nFacts of the case\n4. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in software-related\nservices. In all years under consideration, the assessments were reopened\nunder Section

SURESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 6(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1327 & 1328/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18) बनाम/ Sureshbhai Ranchhodbhai Acit Circle 5(2)(1), Ahmedabad Patel Vs. 1, Shayona Darshan & Bunglow, Opp. Gujarat High Court, Ghatlodia, Acit, Circle 6(1), Gujarat – 380061 Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp1167A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R B Tank, A.R. Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr Revenue By : 26/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

delay in filing the two appeals is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken following grounds in these appeals: ITA No.1327/Ahd/2024 – A.Y. 2016-17 “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC Delhi, has grievously erred in facts and law while passing the order under consideration 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC Delhi, erred in facts

SURESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1327 & 1328/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18) बनाम/ Sureshbhai Ranchhodbhai Acit Circle 5(2)(1), Ahmedabad Patel Vs. 1, Shayona Darshan & Bunglow, Opp. Gujarat High Court, Ghatlodia, Acit, Circle 6(1), Gujarat – 380061 Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp1167A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R B Tank, A.R. Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr Revenue By : 26/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

delay in filing the two appeals is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken following grounds in these appeals: ITA No.1327/Ahd/2024 – A.Y. 2016-17 “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC Delhi, has grievously erred in facts and law while passing the order under consideration 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC Delhi, erred in facts