WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133(6) of the Act was received. Likewise, the assessee also failed to submit ledger confirmation from the impugned parties. Thus, the AO added the above stated difference amount and balance from Swati Processors Pvt Ltd to the total income of the assessee. 22. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that difference with Indian

M/S. WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, BARODA

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133(6) of the Act was received. Likewise, the assessee also failed to submit ledger confirmation from the impugned parties. Thus, the AO added the above stated difference amount and balance from Swati Processors Pvt Ltd to the total income of the assessee. 22. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that difference with Indian

VIKAS VIJAY GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby\ndismissed

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No. 404/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year 2017-18\nVikas Vijay Gupta\nPrincipal Commissioner\n604 Sarap,\nof Income Tax,\nOpp. Navjivan Press Vs Ahmedabad-1,\nP.O. Navjivan,\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad-380014,\nGujarat\n(Respondent)\nPAN: AEOPG6723L\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R.\nRevenue Represented: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT-DR\nDate of hearing : 27-02-2025\nDate of pronouncement : 27-05-2025\nआदे

u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act, thus\nmodified the reassessment order.\n7. Ld. Counsel Shri Jaimin Shah appearing for the assessee\nsubmitted that the penalty proceedings are independent and\ndistinct from the assessment proceedings and relied upon Delhi\nHigh Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. J.K. D'Costa reported in\n[1982] 133 ITR 7 wherein

PARAG V. CHUGH,,GODHRA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, BARODA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act to the returned income under section 153A of the Act, and therefore appellant cannot be treated to be assessee concealing income. 1.02 Your appellant prays to hold so now and delete the impugned penalty. 2.00 YOUR APPELLANY CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND AND /OR DELETE ALL OR ANY GROUND(S) TAKE HEREINABOVE

PARAG V. CHUGH,,GODHRA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, BARODA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act to the returned income under section 153A of the Act, and therefore appellant cannot be treated to be assessee concealing income. 1.02 Your appellant prays to hold so now and delete the impugned penalty. 2.00 YOUR APPELLANY CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND AND /OR DELETE ALL OR ANY GROUND(S) TAKE HEREINABOVE

SHRI VIJAY D. PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT-7,, AHMEDABAD

133, for the proposition that non initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer renders the assessment order erroneous for the purposes of exercising revisionary I.T.A No. 2022/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 6 Vijay D. Patel vs. CIT powers by CIT u/s 263 of the Act. He further contended that subsequent order passed making no additions on the directions

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, BARODA vs. M/S/ AMAR MINING COMPANY,, BARODA

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 1998-99

penalty. It is submitted that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) are applicable in a case where the appellant has not been able to substantiate with evidences the expenses incurred by it. In the instant case the appellant had submitted all the evidences available with it and these evidences has not been found to be incorrect or fraudulent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANJAY PRATAPRAI MEHTA, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

271(1)(c) of the Act. The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- 2. “1. In the facts and on the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing to delete the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) holding that the issue has been decided in favour of appellant by the Hon’ble ITAT, consequential penalty u/s.271

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2)(FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 8. Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and law on the issue. The action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and therefore deserves to be quashed. I.T.A Nos. 85 & 87/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 Page

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(2), (FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 8. Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and law on the issue. The action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and therefore deserves to be quashed. I.T.A Nos. 85 & 87/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 Page

MANAS KUMAR DAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

133(6). Aggrieved by the order assessee wishes to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 250 of the Act. 3) In the meanwhile I had shifted to Pune due to my job requirement. Since I am not checking IT portal/email frequently, I was not aware of the order passed by CIT(A) due to which I could

MANAS KUMAR DAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

133(6). Aggrieved by the order assessee wishes to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 250 of the Act. 3) In the meanwhile I had shifted to Pune due to my job requirement. Since I am not checking IT portal/email frequently, I was not aware of the order passed by CIT(A) due to which I could

CREELOTEX ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

133, 135 & 136/Ahd/2015 also rests on similar facts and involves identical issue towards imposition of varied penalties. In parity with the reasonings in IT(SS)A No. 134/Ahd/2015 (supra), all other captioned appeals of the assessees concerning AYs. 2006- 07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are allowed with consequential directions to AO to delete respective penalties.” 7. It is further

DEVNANDAN REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s. 274 r.w.s, 271(l)(c) of the Act for concealment of income on 22/03/2013. The assessee did not submit any reply. To meet with the end of justice, the assessee was given one more opportunity to furnish explanation if any, vide this office show cause notice dated 11/09/2013 which

SHRI AJAY MAYOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 8. In response, Ld. DR placed reliance on the observations made by CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 10. The issue before us is with respect to the levy of penalty under section 271

MAYUR NIRMALKUMAR JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealing income. 6. In appeal, Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the additions with the following observations: “7.3 After considering findings of the AO and submissions of the appellant, this ground is adjudicated as under. It is seen that during the assessment proceedings the AO noted that

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

133 (Guj.). 28. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is not a disputed fact that the ownership of the said movable assets such as moving and ready to use machines are owned by the assessee. The assessee has made use of these assets related to construction and infrastructure activity conducted

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

133 (Guj.). 28. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is not a disputed fact that the ownership of the said movable assets such as moving and ready to use machines are owned by the assessee. The assessee has made use of these assets related to construction and infrastructure activity conducted

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

133 (Guj.). 28. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is not a disputed fact that the ownership of the said movable assets such as moving and ready to use machines are owned by the assessee. The assessee has made use of these assets related to construction and infrastructure activity conducted