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

section 68 in respect of such loan amount was justified. In the result, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts of the case in sustaining addition made by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs u/s. 68 of the Act. 10. In the result, the ground

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

section 68 in respect of such loan amount was justified. In the result, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts of the case in sustaining addition made by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs u/s. 68 of the Act. 10. In the result, the ground

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

section 68 in respect of such loan amount was justified. In the result, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts of the case in sustaining addition made by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs u/s. 68 of the Act. 10. In the result, the ground

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

section 68 in respect of such loan amount was justified. In the result, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts of the case in sustaining addition made by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs u/s. 68 of the Act. 10. In the result, the ground

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

section 68 in respect of such loan amount was justified. In the result, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts of the case in sustaining addition made by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 5 lakhs u/s. 68 of the Act. 10. In the result, the ground

THE ACIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CHANDRAKANT G PATEL, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We repeat that the assessee'smultifolded errors hereinabove inter alia in not having declared only two sale transactions instead of three, not adjusting cost of indexation on proportionate basis, not declaring interest income in 1000s of rupees and not being able to prove cost of improvement which were admitted latter on being pointed

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not find infirmity in the order passed by the Ld CIT [A]. I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 12 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 13.1. As against the quantum appeal common order passed by the co-ordinate

THE ACIT(E),CIRCLE-2 , AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not find infirmity in the order passed by the Ld CIT [A]. I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 12 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 13.1. As against the quantum appeal common order passed by the co-ordinate

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not find infirmity in the order passed by the Ld CIT [A]. I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 12 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 13.1. As against the quantum appeal common order passed by the co-ordinate

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not find infirmity in the order passed by the Ld CIT [A]. I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2011-12 and Ors. Page No 12 ACIT(E) Vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority 13.1. As against the quantum appeal common order passed by the co-ordinate

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. The penalty is thus imposable on the addition of Rs.42,77,609 out of Interest cost capitalisation and out of interest, relating to earning of exempt income on Rs.26,83,618. It is added that with the deletion of the word 'deliberate' from the provisions of section 271

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. The penalty is thus imposable on the addition of Rs.42,77,609 out of Interest cost capitalisation and out of interest, relating to earning of exempt income on Rs.26,83,618. It is added that with the deletion of the word 'deliberate' from the provisions of section 271

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. The penalty is thus imposable on the addition of Rs.42,77,609 out of Interest cost capitalisation and out of interest, relating to earning of exempt income on Rs.26,83,618. It is added that with the deletion of the word 'deliberate' from the provisions of section 271

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. The penalty is thus imposable on the addition of Rs.42,77,609 out of Interest cost capitalisation and out of interest, relating to earning of exempt income on Rs.26,83,618. It is added that with the deletion of the word 'deliberate' from the provisions of section 271

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act. The penalty is thus imposable on the addition of Rs.42,77,609 out of Interest cost capitalisation and out of interest, relating to earning of exempt income on Rs.26,83,618. It is added that with the deletion of the word 'deliberate' from the provisions of section 271

SHALLU BANSAL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 30/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shallu Bansal Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Plot No.1497-B Vs Ahmedabad. Opp: Theosophical Lodge Rupani Circle Bhavnagar 364 001. Pan : Aijpb 8274 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.R. Popat, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.Dr

U/s. 80C ..... 1,00,000/- Rs. 1,00,000/- Total income Rs. 13,94,513/- Rounded off Rs.13,94,510/- Assessed Income ..... Rs.13,94,510/- 4. The AO has initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. He ultimately imposed penalty of Rs.3,15,000/- on this addition. Appeal

SHRI RUSHABHDEV SWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar&Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and directed the charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment order passed under section 144 read with section 147, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The assessee raised multiple legal and factual grounds, contending that

GSPC PIPAVAV POWER COMPANY LTD.-GPPC,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1) (c) be quashed. (iii) Such and further relief as the nature and circumstances of the case may justify.” 3. The fact in brief is that return of income declaring income at Rs. nil was filed on 28th Sep, 2012. The case of the assessee was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

271 A(1) (c) r.w.s. 274 is also being issued separately to Shri Natwarlal Laxmandas Patel, the partner of the firm for non compliance of summons. As evident from the impounded Annexure A/5, the total collection/ receipt of the assessee was Rs.50,29,702/-, the assessee was compulsorily required to get its account audited u/s 44AB of the Act. Since