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

condonation of delay in filing the appeal; ITA Nos. 2321, 2322 & 2323/Ahd/2013 M/s. Stallion FinstockPvt Ltd vs. JCIT AY :2010-11 to 2012-13 - 2– ii) levying penalty of Rs.44,000/ (AY 2010-11), Rs.43,900/- (AY2011- 12) and Rs.24,174/- (AY 2012-13) applying the provisions of Section 272A(2)(k

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

delay of 362 days is hereby condoned. Gomtidas Govindram Sadhu vs. ITO A.Y. 2017-18 3 Facts of the Case 5. The assessee is an individual engaged in performing religious duties as a priest of Ramji Mandir, Shertha. The assessee did not file a return of income for A.Y. 2017-18. Based on information received, the AO noticed that

THE SIMALIYA DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GODHRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

K Patel, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Ananya Kulshresth, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 09.04.2026 O R D 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

TIMBA MUVADI DUDH MANDALI,MAHIASAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, LUNAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Tr Senthil Kumar

K Patel, AR Respondent by: Shri Uday Kakne Kishanrao, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 11.03.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order