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

addition upheld by the ld. CIT(A) on rental income u/s. 22 of the Act on presumptive basis, the ld. counsel for the assessee conceded that the department has already given 30% deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and he has nothing further to submit in the matter. With respect to ground related to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

addition upheld by the ld. CIT(A) on rental income u/s. 22 of the Act on presumptive basis, the ld. counsel for the assessee conceded that the department has already given 30% deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and he has nothing further to submit in the matter. With respect to ground related to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

addition upheld by the ld. CIT(A) on rental income u/s. 22 of the Act on presumptive basis, the ld. counsel for the assessee conceded that the department has already given 30% deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and he has nothing further to submit in the matter. With respect to ground related to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

addition upheld by the ld. CIT(A) on rental income u/s. 22 of the Act on presumptive basis, the ld. counsel for the assessee conceded that the department has already given 30% deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and he has nothing further to submit in the matter. With respect to ground related to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

addition upheld by the ld. CIT(A) on rental income u/s. 22 of the Act on presumptive basis, the ld. counsel for the assessee conceded that the department has already given 30% deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and he has nothing further to submit in the matter. With respect to ground related to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) on addition of Rs.94,71,966/- in the book profit u/s. 115JB on account of provision for doubtful debts & advances. The Assessing Officer was added back provision for doubtful debts and advance to book profit u/s.115JB of the Income

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

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) on addition of Rs.94,71,966/- in the book profit u/s. 115JB on account of provision for doubtful debts & advances. The Assessing Officer was added back provision for doubtful debts and advance to book profit u/s.115JB of the Income

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

u/s 153A of the Act as on 7th December 2016 wherein declared additional income of Rs. 25 lakhs against the cash deposited in the bank account and contributed to the partnership firm. The AO against the additional income offered initiated penalty proceedings under section 271

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

u/s 153A of the Act as on 7th December 2016 wherein declared additional income of Rs. 25 lakhs against the cash deposited in the bank account and contributed to the partnership firm. The AO against the additional income offered initiated penalty proceedings under section 271

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

u/s 153A of the Act as on 7th December 2016 wherein declared additional income of Rs. 25 lakhs against the cash deposited in the bank account and contributed to the partnership firm. The AO against the additional income offered initiated penalty proceedings under section 271

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KGN INDUSTRIES LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal field by the Revenue is allowed

additions of Rs. 1,86,710/- u/s. 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer ought to have levied penalty u/s. 271F of the Act for non-filing of Return of Income. Thus the A.O. has erred in levied penalty u/s. 271

RAOOF R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of concealment of income. 6. The assessee during the penalty proceedings submitted that he has not concealed or furnished any inaccurate particular of income. Similarly, the addition

ANISHA R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of concealment of income. 6. The assessee during the penalty proceedings submitted that he has not concealed or furnished any inaccurate particular of income. Similarly, the addition

RAOOF R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of concealment of income. 6. The assessee during the penalty proceedings submitted that he has not concealed or furnished any inaccurate particular of income. Similarly, the addition

RAOOF R DHANANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of concealment of income. 6. The assessee during the penalty proceedings submitted that he has not concealed or furnished any inaccurate particular of income. Similarly, the addition

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as follows: Penalty u/s. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 271(1)(c) levied on 1. Deduction u/s. 13,00,142/- 24,19,109/- 28,48,053/- 26,19,812/- 35E of the Act 2. Depreciation on 36,23,598/- 46,82,342/- -- 17,04,037/- Sale and Leased Assets

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as follows: Penalty u/s. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 271(1)(c) levied on 1. Deduction u/s. 13,00,142/- 24,19,109/- 28,48,053/- 26,19,812/- 35E of the Act 2. Depreciation on 36,23,598/- 46,82,342/- -- 17,04,037/- Sale and Leased Assets

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as follows: Penalty u/s. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 271(1)(c) levied on 1. Deduction u/s. 13,00,142/- 24,19,109/- 28,48,053/- 26,19,812/- 35E of the Act 2. Depreciation on 36,23,598/- 46,82,342/- -- 17,04,037/- Sale and Leased Assets

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as follows: Penalty u/s. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 271(1)(c) levied on 1. Deduction u/s. 13,00,142/- 24,19,109/- 28,48,053/- 26,19,812/- 35E of the Act 2. Depreciation on 36,23,598/- 46,82,342/- -- 17,04,037/- Sale and Leased Assets