THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

house property qua the properties held as stock in trade on account of deemed rental income. 6.4 As the assessee succeeds on the reasoning as elaborated in the preceding paragraph, therefore we are not inclined to adjudicate the other contentions raised by the Ld.AR for the assessee. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA Nos.37-38/AHD/2021 A.Y.s

GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

reopen the assessments for the AYs in question does not satisfy the requirement of law.” ix. M/s. Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “As mentioned above, the appellant had contested the truthfulness of the statements of these two witnesses and wanted to discredit

GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

reopen the assessments for the AYs in question does not satisfy the requirement of law.” ix. M/s. Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “As mentioned above, the appellant had contested the truthfulness of the statements of these two witnesses and wanted to discredit

SHRI VISHAL JAGDISHBHAI MEHTA,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5),, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopening of assessment is bad in law and addition of Rs. 1,56,8007- under the head House Property. I have

TANVI SANDEEP MATHUR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

reopening is after expiry of four years. Thus, ground nos.2 & 3 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed. 13. Though it is not necessary to comment on the merits since the assessment itself becomes nonest after deciding the said issues, it will be appropriate to comment on the merit as allotment letter issued by the Housing Society dated 16.04.2007 clearly

ITO-WD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AVS CORPORATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

housing project. The Assessing Officer was also of the opinion that the assessee firm was involved in availing accommodation entries through entry operators. Based on the evidences found during the search/survey, the Assessing Officer concluded that the receipts recorded by the Shri Gautam shah in the excel sheet found from his pen drive were nothing but unaccounted cash receipts

ITO-WD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AVS CORPORATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

housing project. The Assessing Officer was also of the opinion that the assessee firm was involved in availing accommodation entries through entry operators. Based on the evidences found during the search/survey, the Assessing Officer concluded that the receipts recorded by the Shri Gautam shah in the excel sheet found from his pen drive were nothing but unaccounted cash receipts

ITO-WD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AVS CORPORATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

housing project. The Assessing Officer was also of the opinion that the assessee firm was involved in availing accommodation entries through entry operators. Based on the evidences found during the search/survey, the Assessing Officer concluded that the receipts recorded by the Shri Gautam shah in the excel sheet found from his pen drive were nothing but unaccounted cash receipts

ABDULVAHED A. SHEIKH, LEGAL HEIROF LATE SMT. SARIFABEN BIKHUBHAI SHEK,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

property during the year along with other Co-owners and his share in the transaction was Rs. 35,79,625/- ,but no return of income had been filed by the asseseee. Subsequently assessment was framed , subjecting the Long Term Capital Gain earned thereon, amounting to Rs. 32,63,644/-, to tax by taking the assessee’s share as the sale

PRADIPSINH MAHAVIRSINH GOHIL,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

Assessing Officer and from the perusal of the records, it appears that the assessee had fully utilized the amount in purchasing the new house property within the limit specified u/s. 54F of the Act. The reopening

TEJAS C. JOSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

house property, business income and other sources. For the Asst. Year 2011-12, assessee filed its original Return of Income on 07-07-2012 declaring total income of Rs.17,54,560/-. As per information available with the Department, the assessee has received credit entry amounting to Rs.4,05,553/- of his minor child and not clubbed the same income

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

reopened. Finally ignoring all the submissions of the ITA Nos.1450&1451 and 1562&1563/Ahd/2024 (By Revenue) DCIT vs. Hindva Builders Asst. Years : 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 respectively appellant and judicial pronouncements, the AO had made addition of the entire (gross) on money received by the appellant amounting to Rs. 10,26,63,022/ as unexplained money

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

reopened. Finally ignoring all the submissions of the ITA Nos.1450&1451 and 1562&1563/Ahd/2024 (By Revenue) DCIT vs. Hindva Builders Asst. Years : 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 respectively appellant and judicial pronouncements, the AO had made addition of the entire (gross) on money received by the appellant amounting to Rs. 10,26,63,022/ as unexplained money

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

reopened. Finally ignoring all the submissions of the ITA Nos.1450&1451 and 1562&1563/Ahd/2024 (By Revenue) DCIT vs. Hindva Builders Asst. Years : 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 respectively appellant and judicial pronouncements, the AO had made addition of the entire (gross) on money received by the appellant amounting to Rs. 10,26,63,022/ as unexplained money

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

reopened. Finally ignoring all the submissions of the ITA Nos.1450&1451 and 1562&1563/Ahd/2024 (By Revenue) DCIT vs. Hindva Builders Asst. Years : 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 respectively appellant and judicial pronouncements, the AO had made addition of the entire (gross) on money received by the appellant amounting to Rs. 10,26,63,022/ as unexplained money

MR. ARPANBHAI VIRAMBHAI DESAI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed in above terms

reopening of the assessment in the case of Arpan\nVirambhai Desai, for A.Y. 2017-18.\nITA Nos.338, 339, 758 & 759/Ahd/2024\n[Mr. Arpanbhai Virambhai Desai]\n-17-\nAssessee is an individual. The assessee has filed his return of income\nfor A.Y. 2017-18 on 26/03/2018 declaring total income of Rs.\n10,95,690/-.\na\n1. 1. As information received related

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio