LATE ASHVINBHAI UMEDBHAI PATEL (DECEASED) BY LEGAL HEIR SMIT ASHVINBHAI PATEL,KHEDA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, NADIAD

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

u/s 69 under section 69A OF THE Income tax Act, 1961 in respect of sums deposited in bank account and Fixed deposits in names of family members to which section 69A did not apply. There is thus no case for levying penalty on account of erroneous addition of deemed income. It be so held now. 3. The ld NFAC/CIT

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI. SURESHCHANDRA SHANTILAL BRAHMBHATT, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Shri. Sureshchandra Shantilal Ward-1(2)(4), Ahmedabad, Brahmbhatt, Room No. 220, V. 4 Shreenath Bangalow Part-2 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Matrushree Party Plot, Near Sachin Tower, Vejalpur, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad-380005 Ahmedabad-380051, Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Actpb8904H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Tushar Hemani, Sr. Ar & Sh. Parimalsinh Parmar, Ar Revenue By: Sh. Prasad Rao Waghe Annasaheb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.04.2024

159 ITR 78 (SC) iv) CIT vs. Sanjay K. Thakkar Tax Appeal Nos. 524 of 2004, 525 and 526 of 2004 and 579 to 583 of 2003 dated 12-9-2005 (Guj. HC) v) ITO Vs Kailpar Credit & Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.421/Ahd/2008 (ITAT. Ahd.) I am not inclined to accept the findings of the A.O. there

M/S. ATRI DEVELOPERS,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, Cir.3(3) M/S.Atri Developers Ahmedabad. Vs 19, Ambalal House Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Atri Developers The Dcit, Cir.3(3) 19, Ambalal House Vs Ahmedabad. Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act.” Revenues’s appeal ITA No.2855/A/2016: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the relief of Rs.5,98,26,995/- out of total addition of Rs.6,78,33,882/- made on account of undisclosed income. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ATRI DEVELOPERS,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, Cir.3(3) M/S.Atri Developers Ahmedabad. Vs 19, Ambalal House Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Atri Developers The Dcit, Cir.3(3) 19, Ambalal House Vs Ahmedabad. Mayur Park Society Satellite Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aatfa 1086 D

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act.” Revenues’s appeal ITA No.2855/A/2016: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the relief of Rs.5,98,26,995/- out of total addition of Rs.6,78,33,882/- made on account of undisclosed income. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

SANJAY PATEL,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PATAN

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2014-15 Sanjay Patel Vs. Ito, Ward-1 Krishna Mill Compound Patan. Station Road Unjha, Mehsana Gujarat 384 170 Pan : Alppp 5864 K (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parimalsingh B. Parmar, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short] for the Asst.Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds for challenging the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) as under: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in dismissing the matter

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

159 x Rs.5.39] A.Y.2008-09 Rs.1,62,26,344 [RMB 30,10,467 x Rs.5.39] I.T.A No. 1517 & 1621/Ahd/2019 A.Y.. 2008-09 Page No 3 DCIT Vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. 2.1. However during the assessment proceedings, the Assessee Company vide its letter dated 17-11-2011 claimed the Tax Credit in respect of these taxes withheld in China as admissible

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

159 x Rs.5.39] A.Y.2008-09 Rs.1,62,26,344 [RMB 30,10,467 x Rs.5.39] I.T.A No. 1517 & 1621/Ahd/2019 A.Y.. 2008-09 Page No 3 DCIT Vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. 2.1. However during the assessment proceedings, the Assessee Company vide its letter dated 17-11-2011 claimed the Tax Credit in respect of these taxes withheld in China as admissible