RAVINDRABHAI LAKSHMANRAV MANE,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee in IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in filing the above appeals and take up the appeals on merits of the case. 7. Ld. Counsel Shri Aseem L. Thakkar submitted that the only additions made in all these assessments are unexplained cash credits

RAVINDRABHAI LAKSHMANRAV MANE,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee in IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in filing the above appeals and take up the appeals on merits of the case. 7. Ld. Counsel Shri Aseem L. Thakkar submitted that the only additions made in all these assessments are unexplained cash credits

SHRI KHAMBHAT TALUKA SARVAJANIK KELAVANI MANDAL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

condone the delay. He submitted that when the accountant had been negligent before the AO and also before the Ld. CIT(A), which resulted in ex-parte orders, the assessee should have taken precaution to ensure that the present appeal was filed within time. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee cannot escape by merely passing on the blame

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AWAS DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 368/Ahd/2020 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, M/S Awas Developers, Central Circle-1(4), Vs. “Agam Buglows” Ahmedabad. Opp. Subhash Society, Sanand-Kalol Road, Ahmedabad.

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 7. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. C IT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored

BABUBHAI PUNMAJI GEHLOT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

unexplained cash credit to be deleted fully. 2. The Appellant submit that the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts to confirmed the addition made by the Ld A.O. amounting to Rs. 2,08,67,654/- on account of estimation of Net Profit @ 8% on Gross Sales which is unreasonable without appreciating the facts that

BABUBHAI PUNMAJI GEHLOT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

unexplained cash credit to be deleted fully. 2. The Appellant submit that the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts to confirmed the addition made by the Ld A.O. amounting to Rs. 2,08,67,654/- on account of estimation of Net Profit @ 8% on Gross Sales which is unreasonable without appreciating the facts that

PARESHKUMAR PUNAMCHAND SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Reference is drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji (1987 AIR 1353(SC)). 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in memo of appeal filed with ITAT, reads

THE ANKLAV MERCANTILE CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,ANAND vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

condoning delay in fulfilling appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating addition made U/s 68 of the Act by Ld. A.O. of Rs.8,17,68,248/- as unexplained cash credit

PINKAL SURESHKUMAR KOTHARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1303/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ Pinkal Sureshkumar Income Tax Officer Kothari Ward-5(2)(1), Vs. 4, Nemrajul Flat, Ahmedabad Navavikas Gruh Road, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat – 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amlpk3944L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Parth Mehta, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr

delay in filing of the present appeal, which I, therefore, condone in the interest of justice. 5. Taking up the appeal of the assessee for adjudication, at the outset itself, Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the solitary issue in the present appeal relates to addition confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of investment made

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) after a delay of more than two years. The delay was attributed to the assessee’s illiteracy, lack of understanding of the proceedings (as the notices were in English), and the mistaken belief that agricultural income was not taxable. The assessee

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) after a delay of more than two years. The delay was attributed to the assessee’s illiteracy, lack of understanding of the proceedings (as the notices were in English), and the mistaken belief that agricultural income was not taxable. The assessee

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) after a delay of more than two years. The delay was attributed to the assessee’s illiteracy, lack of understanding of the proceedings (as the notices were in English), and the mistaken belief that agricultural income was not taxable. The assessee

ARUNBHAI NIMBALKAR GAJARE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.567/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Arunbhai Nimbalkar Gajare The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 2, Krishna Appt Ward-5(3)(4) V/S. Bhudarpura Road Ahmedabad Ambawadi Ahmedabasd – 380 006 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aktpg 8637 L अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

cash deposits u/s.69A of the I.T.Act, 1961 without any basis. 6. The learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition addition of Rs.3,73,550/- made by Assessing Officer treating the credit entries in bank account No.306656602 held by the appellant with Central Bank of India, Bhuderpura Branch, Paldi, Ahmedabad during the year under appeal as alleged

BHAVANJI JUGAJI THAKOR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

delay is condoned. 5.1 The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) erred in law and facts in making addition of Rs.34,30,000/- as unexplained cash credit

SHRI HIMANSHU L. SHETHIA (HUF),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(4),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 Himanshu L. Shethia (Huf) Ito, Ward-5(3)(4) Prop: Himanshu Fabrics Vs Ahmedabad. 524, New Cloth Market O/S Raipur Gate, Raipur Ahmedabad 380002. (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar

condone the delay of 9 days in filing appeal and take the appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is Karta of HUF and running whole-sale trade in cloth in the name and style of “M/s.Himanshu Fabrics”. For the Asstt.Year 2012-13, the assessee has filed return of income on 30.9.2012 declaring total

MOHMMADHAROON BABUBHAI SHAIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Mohmmadharoon Babubhai Shaikh The Ito, Shrine Co-Op Ind. Estate Vs. Ward-1(1)(2) Rakhial, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan : Afaps 2723 P (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Vipul Gohil, Ca Assessee By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2025

unexplained cash deposits during the demonetisation period. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 The appeal was filed with a delay of 373 days beyond the prescribed period. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit, explaining that he had, within the statutory period, 2 entrusted the filing to a professional representative, CA Piyush Shah

AMIT RAJNIKANT JOSHI,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.367/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Amit Rajnikant Joshi The Dy.Cit बनाम/ C-29, Aryaman Bungalows Anand Nagar V/S. Opp. Anand Niketan School Prahaladnagar Road Thaltej, Shilaj Road Ahmedabad – 380 05 Ahmedabad – 380 059 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abmpj 6798 F अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

unexplained cash credit of Rs.27,00,000/-. d. Any other ground which may be urged before or during the time of hearing of the appeal. 5. It was observed that there was a delay of 7 days in filing appeal before us. The assessee filed an application for condonation

SHAILESHBHAI FULCHANDBHAI JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Years : 2016-17 Shaileshbhai Fulchandbhai Jain, Assistant Commissioner E-21, Aakash Tower, Judges Vs Of Income-Tax, Bungalow Road, Bodakdev, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad-382054 Ahmedabad Pan : Aaopj 8254 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27/04/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar:

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and take up the appeal for hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of trading of furnace oil, fuel oil and bitumen in the name and style of Subhi Impex. The assessee is also IITA No. 104/Ahd/2020 Shaileshbhai