SHRI PRAVINCHANDRA R PATEL,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

69D of the Act. As such, it is the onus of the revenue to bring out the necessary evidence to hold that the assessee has made investments in the impugned land which is unexplained under the provisions of section 69B of the Act. Likewise, the contents of the email having attachments of page 157 and 158 were found from

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA vs. NEOTECH EDUCATION FOUNDATION, VADODARA

69D of the Act. As such, it is the onus of the revenue to bring out the necessary evidence to hold that the assessee has made investments in the impugned land which is unexplained under the provisions of section 69B of the Act. Likewise, the contents of the email having attachments of page 157 and 158 were found from

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. RADHIKA JEWELLERS, VADODARA

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowances were made on account of late payment of Provident Fund of Rs.31,950/-, subscription expenses of Rs.6,000/- and out of Car and petrol expenses of Rs.93,313/- and no addition is made out on account of ‘business income’. However, the assessing officer initiated penalty proceedings and levied minimum penalty of Rs.62,11,054/- under section

SHREE INFRASTRUCTURE,VADOADARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1563/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2014-15 Shree Infrastructure, D.C.I.T., Sthapatya-2, Vs. Circle-1(2), Behind Keya Motors, Vadodara. Tp-13, Vadodara-390002. Pan: Acifs6977Q

section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D of the Act. The learned CIT-A also held that all the case law relied by the assessee pertain to period before 2013- 14 therefore distinguishable on fact. Thus the learned CIT-A confirmed the disallowances