SHRI ADHIRAJ PRANAY SHODHAN(HUF),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: The Death Of A Mitakshara Coparcener.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified.” 3. To adjudicate on this appeal, only a few material facts need to be taken note of. The assessee before us is a HUF. During the relevant previous year, the assessee sold three properties. In the income tax return filed by the assessee, however, only the capital gains

JT. CIT (OSD), CENTRAL, CIRCLE-2,, VADODARA vs. M/S. SHREEDHAR ASSOCIATES,, BARODA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Amarjit Singh

u/s 271(l)(c). 5.1 During the penalty proceeding it was submitted by the assessee that the amount offered as additional business income pursuant to survey operation was for the ongoing year which was dully incorporated in the books of accounts and in the regular return of income with taxes duly paid. However, the AO was of the view that

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN TILES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ITA Nos.121-122/Ahd/2020 & ITA Nos.123-127/Ahd/2020 Asst. Years –2005-06 to 2006-07 & 2004-05 to 2008-09 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2005-06 to 2006-07 and 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. ITA No. 121/Ahd/2020(A.Y. 2005-06)(Revenue’s Appeal

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation-7 are hereby initiated.” 24. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT (A), the Assessee is in appeal before us. 25. The Ld. AR before us submitted that in the identical facts and circumstances in the own case of the assessee in ITA No. 1666/AHD/2016 the impugned addition was deleted

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation-7 are hereby initiated.” 24. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT (A), the Assessee is in appeal before us. 25. The Ld. AR before us submitted that in the identical facts and circumstances in the own case of the assessee in ITA No. 1666/AHD/2016 the impugned addition was deleted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation-7 are hereby initiated.” 24. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT (A), the Assessee is in appeal before us. 25. The Ld. AR before us submitted that in the identical facts and circumstances in the own case of the assessee in ITA No. 1666/AHD/2016 the impugned addition was deleted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation-7 are hereby initiated.” 24. Being aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT (A), the Assessee is in appeal before us. 25. The Ld. AR before us submitted that in the identical facts and circumstances in the own case of the assessee in ITA No. 1666/AHD/2016 the impugned addition was deleted

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 484, 485 & 486/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Mahalaxmi Infracontract Of Income Tax Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-1(4), B-21, Corporate House, Ahmedabad Opp-Pakwan-Ii, S. G. Highway, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagcm4615E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri B. K. Patel, A.Rs. Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr Revenue By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 22/01/2024 & Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 31/05/2024 Pronouncement

171 Taxmann 474 the correct test which the authorities below had to apply was whether the appellant was in the business of transportation and whether the vehicles were used in the said business is proved beyond doubt on above basis. 2.11 We would also like to place reliance on the following judgements: 2.13.1 CIT vs. Madan

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 484, 485 & 486/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Mahalaxmi Infracontract Of Income Tax Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-1(4), B-21, Corporate House, Ahmedabad Opp-Pakwan-Ii, S. G. Highway, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagcm4615E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri B. K. Patel, A.Rs. Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr Revenue By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 22/01/2024 & Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 31/05/2024 Pronouncement

171 Taxmann 474 the correct test which the authorities below had to apply was whether the appellant was in the business of transportation and whether the vehicles were used in the said business is proved beyond doubt on above basis. 2.11 We would also like to place reliance on the following judgements: 2.13.1 CIT vs. Madan

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD vs. MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 484, 485 & 486/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Mahalaxmi Infracontract Of Income Tax Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-1(4), B-21, Corporate House, Ahmedabad Opp-Pakwan-Ii, S. G. Highway, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagcm4615E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri B. K. Patel, A.Rs. Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr Revenue By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 22/01/2024 & Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 31/05/2024 Pronouncement

171 Taxmann 474 the correct test which the authorities below had to apply was whether the appellant was in the business of transportation and whether the vehicles were used in the said business is proved beyond doubt on above basis. 2.11 We would also like to place reliance on the following judgements: 2.13.1 CIT vs. Madan

THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

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

penalty proceeding u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act.” 5. As against this disallowances mentioned above, five disallowances were already considered by this Tribunal in ITA No. 3003/Ahd/2010 & ors. relating to A.Ys. 2003-04 & ors., ITA Nos. 472/Ahd/2013 & Ors. (Gujarat Industrial Power Co. Ltd. ) - 5 - vide order dated 28.02.2022. It is being agreed by both the parties. The issues

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

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

penalty proceeding u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act.” 5. As against this disallowances mentioned above, five disallowances were already considered by this Tribunal in ITA No. 3003/Ahd/2010 & ors. relating to A.Ys. 2003-04 & ors., ITA Nos. 472/Ahd/2013 & Ors. (Gujarat Industrial Power Co. Ltd. ) - 5 - vide order dated 28.02.2022. It is being agreed by both the parties. The issues