INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DEEPA RAJENDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

house property. (ii) The assessee was unable to furnish sufficient proof for purchase of shares of M/s. Shree Shaleen Textiles Limited. (iii) The financial results of the Penny Stock

INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. DEEPA RAJENDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

house property. (ii) The assessee was unable to furnish sufficient proof for purchase of shares of M/s. Shree Shaleen Textiles Limited. (iii) The financial results of the Penny Stock

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

Properties and projects Ltd. were purchased on 10/10/2014 at the cost of Rs. 5,00,000/- and were sold on 20/06/2017 for Rs. 9,97,500/- and similarly 50,000/- shares of Purple Enterprises limited were purchased at the cost of Rs. 9,41,250/- on 02.01.2015 and subsequently sold on 20.06.2017 for Rs. 14,41,250/-. It was submitted

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DEVARSH DHARMENDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

penny stock. 5. The facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual deriving income from house property and long

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DHARMENDRA C SHAH- HUF, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

penny stock. 5. The facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual deriving income from house property and long

ROBIN RAMAVTAR GOENKA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

House, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054 (Appellant) PAN: ANDPG9739Q (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT-DR & Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 03-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-05-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- These appeals are filed by the Assessee

SHRI PURAV DAHYABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 364/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2015-2016 Purav Dahyabhai Patel, Pr. C.I.T-1, 10, Vrundavan Bungalows Part-3, Vs. Ahmedabad. Thaltej-Shilaj Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380059. Pan: Bejpp7846B

penny stock in view of the report of Investigation wing so that the LTCG on sale of said shares was not genuine and the AO failed to make addition in this respect. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned Principal CIT-A erred in holding the assessment framed by the AO under section

NITABEN GIRISHBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, while upholding the validity of reopening, we set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) on merits and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Nitaben Girishbhai Patel The Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) 33/B, Swi Park, Private Plot Vejalpur Madhuvrund Society Ahmedabad. Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aappp 5738 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Assessee By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

penny stock company, M/s Kushal Ltd. In response, the assessee e- filed her return on 07/02/2022 declaring the same income of Rs.69,60,580/- 2.2 During the course of reassessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Ld. AO that during Financial Year 2016-17, the assessee had purchased and sold 21,185 shares of M/s Kushal Ltd. The assessee

ILABAHEN VIRALKUMAR MEHTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The

Housing office, Beside Society Station Road, C.K. Hall, Anand-388001, Mayfair Road, Gujarat Anand-388001 PAN: BABPM9646N Gujarat (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Ms. Kinjal V. Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 08-07-2024 Date of pronouncement : 08-07-2024 आदेश/ORDER This appeal in ITA No. 17/Ahd/2024 for assessment year 2012-13 filed

NALINI VIJAY SHAH,SATELLITE vs. WARD 3(1)(2) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

house property, capital gains and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and certain additions were made on account of bogus transactions under Section 68 of the Act. 4. Before us, at the time of hearing the Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessment order as well

NALINI VIJAY SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

house property, capital gains and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and certain additions were made on account of bogus transactions under Section 68 of the Act. 4. Before us, at the time of hearing the Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessment order as well

NALINI VIJAY SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

house property, capital gains and income from other sources. The case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and certain additions were made on account of bogus transactions under Section 68 of the Act. 4. Before us, at the time of hearing the Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessment order as well

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Penny stock entered into by the assessee with the Karma Ispat Ltd., and the Assessing Officer had applied his independent mind to the information and upon due satisfaction, led to form an opinion that, the amount of claim of LTCG claimed by the assessee is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, which facts suggests that, circumstances, we are satisfied that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Penny stock entered into by the assessee with the Karma Ispat Ltd., and the Assessing Officer had applied his independent mind to the information and upon due satisfaction, led to form an opinion that, the amount of claim of LTCG claimed by the assessee is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, which facts suggests that, circumstances, we are satisfied that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Penny stock entered into by the assessee with the Karma Ispat Ltd., and the Assessing Officer had applied his independent mind to the information and upon due satisfaction, led to form an opinion that, the amount of claim of LTCG claimed by the assessee is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, which facts suggests that, circumstances, we are satisfied that

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Penny stock entered into by the assessee with the Karma Ispat Ltd., and the Assessing Officer had applied his independent mind to the information and upon due satisfaction, led to form an opinion that, the amount of claim of LTCG claimed by the assessee is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, which facts suggests that, circumstances, we are satisfied that

NALINI VIJAY SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

penny script without carrying out\nproper inquiries.\n4.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not set a\nsiding the assessment as per Section 251(1)(a) as the assessment was concluded\nex parte under section 144.\n4.2 That in the law and/ or on facts, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GHCL LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

penny to Rosebys, therefore, TPO/AO were wrong in saying that there was no hope of recovery of this money financed by BOI - UK and IDBI, India. TPO/AO has no basis of questioning the prudence of the business IDBI/BOI. 10.GHCL took a right business decision in arranging working capital/SBLCs by BOI - UK and IDBI, India as the plan was to.grow

GHCL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

penny to Rosebys, therefore, TPO/AO were wrong in saying that there was no hope of recovery of this money financed by BOI - UK and IDBI, India. TPO/AO has no basis of questioning the prudence of the business IDBI/BOI. 10.GHCL took a right business decision in arranging working capital/SBLCs by BOI - UK and IDBI, India as the plan was to.grow