NITU KUMARI MANISH KUMAR,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Nitu Kumari Manish Kumar The Ito, Ward-2(1)(2) Shreenath Bungalows Vs. Ahmedabad. Opp: Full Stop Society Motera, Chankheda Link Road Gujarat. Pan : Dvfpk 8773 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Nitin Pathak, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.Dr

148A(d) dated 31.03.2022, concluding that income had escaped assessment, and issued notice under section 148. Despite service of notice, no return of income was filed. Initially, the assessment proceedings were transferred to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), but were subsequently returned to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) due to the assessee's failure to register

SWASTIK DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-2018 Swastik Developers The Ito, Ward-3(3)(5), 21, Swastik House Vs. Ahmedabad. B/H.Sardar Patel Stadium Ahmedabad. Pan : Acyfs 0641 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025

House Vs. Ahmedabad. B/h.Sardar Patel Stadium Ahmedabad. PAN : ACYFS 0641 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, AR Assessee by : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.DR Revenue by सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee

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

148A of the Act were initiated by issuing notice\nu/s.148A(b) of the Act to the assessee along with all information\nin the possession of the AO regarding escapement of income of the\nassessee. The information, which was supplied to the assessee in\nthe present case as Annexure 'A' to the notice issued to the\nassessee u/s.148A

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

148A(b) of the Act. Further, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue which suggested that the income of the assessee for the year under consideration had escaped assessment, were supplied to the assessee vide notice dated 23/05/2022. The assessee submitted its reply on 09/06/2022, 22/07/2022 & 25/07/2022. 7.1. After considering the reply of the assessee, the AO passed

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

148A(b) of the Act. Further, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue which suggested that the income of the assessee for the year under consideration had escaped assessment, were supplied to the assessee vide notice dated 23/05/2022. The assessee submitted its reply on 09/06/2022, 22/07/2022 & 25/07/2022. 7.1. After considering the reply of the assessee, the AO passed

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

148A(b) of the Act. Further, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue which suggested that the income of the assessee for the year under consideration had escaped assessment, were supplied to the assessee vide notice dated 23/05/2022. The assessee submitted its reply on 09/06/2022, 22/07/2022 & 25/07/2022. 7.1. After considering the reply of the assessee, the AO passed

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

148A(b) of the Act. Further, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue which suggested that the income of the assessee for the year under consideration had escaped assessment, were supplied to the assessee vide notice dated 23/05/2022. The assessee submitted its reply on 09/06/2022, 22/07/2022 & 25/07/2022. 7.1. After considering the reply of the assessee, the AO passed

PRAGNESH AMRUTLAL GAJJAR,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

house property 66,264 TOTAL 4,85,607 Accordingly, the total income of appellant was assessed at Rs. 9,61,427/- as against the returned income of Rs. 4,75,820/-. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) 4. set aside the assessment order to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

ASHOK KUMAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, INT. TAX, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

housing loan taken by the Appellant and balance amount of Rs.88,31,765/- was paid through the remittances into the Appellant's NRE account made from his own overseas bank account. Thus, the said investment cannot be treated as unexplained investment as the nature and source of the same has duly been explained by the Appellant with supporting documents, Thus