SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

disallowed to the total income of the assessee shall be deemed as concealment of income. 30.1 Coming to case on hand, there was no iota of evidence suggesting that the assessee failed to offer explanation or explanation offered by the assessee was false. Thus the first situation under explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) does not survive

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

disallowed to the total income of the assessee shall be deemed as concealment of income.\n\n30.1 Coming to case on hand, there was no iota of evidence suggesting that the assessee failed to offer explanation or explanation offered by the assessee was false. Thus the first situation under explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) does not survive

DAWOODI BOHRA MUSAFIRKHANA TRUST,KHAMBHAT vs. THE ITO, WARD (EXEMPTION), VADODARA

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

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana Income-Tax Officer, Trust, Ward (Exemption), 1, Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana, Vadodara Opp. Bus Stand, Khambhat, Gujarat-388620 Pan : Aaatd 2007 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Ankit Chokshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana Income-Tax Officer, Trust, Ward (Exemption), 1, Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana, Vadodara Opp. Bus Stand, Khambhat, Gujarat-388620 PAN : AAATD 2007 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee by : Shri

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby partially allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

11 Disallowances of deduction u/s 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 271(1)(c

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby partially allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

11 Disallowances of deduction u/s 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 271(1)(c

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ROHITJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the contents of the seized documents relating to undisclosed consideration on the sale of land amounting to Rs. 1,89,43,840/- and has observed that the relevant seized material (Annexure

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

C Sharedalal for the assessee O P Vaishnav, Commissioner (DR) for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 4 and 5, 2018 Date of pronouncement : January 24, 2019 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, Vice President: 1. These eight appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve some common issues and challenge a consolidated order dated 4th March

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

C Sharedalal for the assessee O P Vaishnav, Commissioner (DR) for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 4 and 5, 2018 Date of pronouncement : January 24, 2019 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, Vice President: 1. These eight appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve some common issues and challenge a consolidated order dated 4th March

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

C Sharedalal for the assessee O P Vaishnav, Commissioner (DR) for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 4 and 5, 2018 Date of pronouncement : January 24, 2019 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, Vice President: 1. These eight appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve some common issues and challenge a consolidated order dated 4th March

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

C Sharedalal for the assessee O P Vaishnav, Commissioner (DR) for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 4 and 5, 2018 Date of pronouncement : January 24, 2019 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, Vice President: 1. These eight appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve some common issues and challenge a consolidated order dated 4th March

THE DY..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

C Sharedalal for the assessee O P Vaishnav, Commissioner (DR) for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 4 and 5, 2018 Date of pronouncement : January 24, 2019 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, Vice President: 1. These eight appeals pertain to the same assessee, involve some common issues and challenge a consolidated order dated 4th March