AIR WIND GREEN ENERGY LIMITED,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

E-Appeals) (for short "Appellate Authority") has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on the grounds of the limitation by not condoning of delay, and confirming the penalty levied u/s. 272A(1)(d) Income Tax Act. 2. The Lrd. Appellate Authority failed to appreciate that the appellant had a reasonable and sufficient caused for not filing the appeal

SOLEONE TRADELINKS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

condonation, of delay is contrary to the principles of natural justice and deserves to be set aside. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating the appellant's grounds on merits and mechanically dismissing the appeal on technical grounds. It is prayed that the matter be restored for fresh adjudication on merits. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) failed

CHINTAN BHARATBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, impugned order is set-aside and appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 678/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18)

delay is condoned. 3. The appellant has challenged the penalty levied under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act to the tune of Rs.30,000/-. 4. The facts of the case is this that during the course of assessment proceeding notices under Section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued to the appellant but without any result

GOMTIDAS GOVINDRAM SADHU,RAMJI MANDIR SHERTHA, GANDHINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 GANDHINAGAR, UDYOG BHAWAN, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes with a direction as above

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 344/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18

E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.12.2023 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for the Assessment Year

M/S. STALLION FINSTOCK PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13 are directed against the common order of the CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad dated 19.07.2013, arising out of separate orders passed by the JCIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad of even date i.e. 29.11.2012 under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income

M/S. STALLION FINSTOCK PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13 are directed against the common order of the CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad dated 19.07.2013, arising out of separate orders passed by the JCIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad of even date i.e. 29.11.2012 under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income

M/S. STALLION FINSTOCK PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes

E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These three appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13 are directed against the common order of the CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad dated 19.07.2013, arising out of separate orders passed by the JCIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad of even date i.e. 29.11.2012 under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income

MAHEMUDKHAN AJAMUDDIN RANA,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 21.08.2024 passed for A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

DINESH RAMANBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1506/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dinesh Ramanbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ 23, Shyam Sharan Part-2 Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Aarohi Club Road Ahmedabad Bopal-Ghuma Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Btbpp 3659 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

2. A notice under Section 148 was issued on 26.03.2021 for A.Y. 2017-18, but it was sent to an email address created by the consultant, and not directly to the assessee. The consultant informed the assessee about the notice, and the assessee entrusted him with the task of handling the assessment. 3. The assessee inquired regularly about the status

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

VANKAR DAYABHAI ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

e- Assessment/Faceless Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 under Section 151A of the Act and hence, the notice issued by the JAO is without jurisdiction and illegal and also in violation of Notification No: 18/2022 dtd. 29-03-2022, requires to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

MR. HASMUKHLAL MAVJIBHAI THAKKAR( PROP. OF M/S. NAVKAR POTEINS),DEESA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WAD-2, PALANPUR

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

E-Appeals) (Hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer") has confirmed the action of Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 who has passed the ex-parte best judgment assessment order u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2017-18 on 23/11/2019 which was received by the appellant on 02/12/2019. In the assessment Order the Lrd. Assessing Officer has raised huge