KUSHAL VINODKUMAR BHATT LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR RAMANLAL BHATT,ANAND vs. THE ACIT (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

condoned. The legal heir contented before CIT[A] that the reassessment order passed under Section 144 r.w.s.147 for A.Y. 2011-12 is void ab initio. Since the notice issued under Section 148, which confers jurisdiction for reassessment, was issued in the name of a deceased person, consequently the entire proceedings legally unsustainable. Despite being informed of the death

PRABODH MOHANLAL SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTL. TAXATION, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to the Asst. Year 2018-19. I.T.A No. 331/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No 2 Prabodh Mohanlal Shah vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Non Resident Indian residing in United States of America has shown Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.56

REJENDRA RAMJIBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTL. TAXN., VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

sections of the Act. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 5. Heard rival submissions at length and perused the materials available on record. As against the draft assessment order, assessee filed its objection

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. LATE KHODAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR LEGAL HEIR NARENDAKUMAR KHODAJI THAKOR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.948/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Ward-4(2)(1) बनाम/ Thakor V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Legal Heir Narendrakumar Khodaji Thakor Ahmedabad – 382 481 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afwpt 1453 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 24/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted it for adjudication. In the appeal, the legal heir submitted that the assessment order passed under section 144 was invalid since the notices under sections 142(1) and 148 of the Act were issued after the death of the assessee and in his name, rendering the proceedings void. It was further

DIGAMBER JAIN SWADHYAY MANDIR TRUST,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 (EXEMP.), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ld. Nfac. Assessee Was Of The Wrong Impression, Separate Appeal Is Not Required To Be Filed Against The Appellate Order Passed Against Rectification Order, But The Same Was Clarified By The Chartered Accountant. It Is Thereafter The Assessee Filed The Above Appeal With A Delay Of 82 Days Which Is Neither Wilful Nor Wanton & Therefore Requested To Condone The Delay.

condone the delay of 82 days in filing the above appeal and take up the main appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a religious Trust maintaining Derasar (Temple), Atithi House (Guest House) and Bhojanshala (Mess) at Songadh (Palitana, Bhavnagar, Gujarat). For the Asst. Year 2016-17, assessee Trust filed its Return

M/S. DHEERAJ EXPORTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2013-14

292B of the Act and hence should have been entertained by the learned CIT(A) and adjudicated on merits. 3.0 Without prejudice to the foregoing, even on merits of the case, the learned AO erred in disallowing a sum of Rs.51,60,137/- being the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA of the Act and the learned

MADHAV INFRA PROJECTS LTD (ERSTWHILE AASHKA CONSTRUCTIONS P. LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Madhav Infra Projects Ltd., Dcit, (Erstwhile Aashka Circle-1(1)(1), Constructions Pvt. Ltd.), Ahmedabad 4, Madhav House, Nr. Panchratna Building, Subhanpura, Baroda, Gujarat Pan : Aadcm 1157 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2024/26.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.06.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 23.12.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts Confirming Action Of Ao Passing An Ex- Parte Order On An Entity That Ceased To Exist Pursuant To Order Of Amalgamation Passed By Hon'Ble High Court. The Order Passed On Non-Entity Is A Nullity & Void Ab Initio That Ought To Be Quashed.

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) [Spice Entertainment Ltd. v. Commr. of Service Tar, (2011 SCC OnLine Del), CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P) Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 288: CIT v. Chanakaya Exporta (P) Ltd., 2014 SCC OnLine Del 7678, CIT. Chanakaya Exports

YOGESH HARGOVINDBHAI JOSHI L/H OF BHAVNABEN Y. JOSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Vice- & Ms.Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Yogesh Hargovindbhai Joshi Vs. The Ito, Ward-6(1)(1) L/H. Of Bhavnaben Y. Joshi Ahmedabad. 8, Manav Pursusharth Society Opp: Hirabhai Tower Uttamnagar, Maninagar Pan : Adupj 2208 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parin Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

delay of 7 days in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal, which is condoned. 3. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: 1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of appellants case, the impugned assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by the LD. Assessing Officer is void and deserves