GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance

GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance

ROMABEN KEYUR THAKORE LEGAL HEIR OF LATE ANANDIBEN JITENDRABHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld.Cit(A), Who Has Confirmed The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer By Observing As Follows:

reassessment was completed by disallowing the claim of deduction u/s.54F of the Act at Rs.79,07,696/- 3. Aggrieved against

JITENDRA RAJKUMAR AGARWAL (PROPRIETOR OF SHRI SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISE),AHMEDABAD vs. ASESSMENT UNIT, IT DEPARTMENT JURIS. AO- THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

reassessment and the entire disallowance before the CIT(A). The assessee contended that reopening under section 147 was bad in law. The assessee

AVANI PETROCHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE PR.CIT(CENTRAL), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

disallowance u/s. 14A, thereby rendering the reassessment order erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Hence

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA vs. THE BHARUCH DIST. CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LIMITED, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

reassessed at Rs. 18,44,82,886/- after disallowing the excess deduction of Rs. 1,88,40,841/-. Additionally, penalty

RAMESHKUMAR G. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(5) PRESENT JURISDICTION ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings under section 147/148; (ii)\naddition of Rs.91,71,722/- as unexplained income under section 69A; and\n(iii) disallowance

GAYATRI CREATIVES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2) NOW CIRCLE 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2010-11

reassessment proceedings thereby stating that the assessee has followed work-in- progress method of accounting and already paid taxes accordingly. The CIT(A) has totally ignored this fact and has passed the order without giving any reasons to that effect. Hence, on merit also the assessee proves that the disallowance

INNOVATE DERIVATIVES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

reassessment by holding that the sale of LHSL script was identified to provide accommodation entry, therefore disallowed the entire loss

SHREE SARVODAYA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,VADODARA vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment being bad in law, illegal and non-est.. 2.00 Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80P of the Act amounting

SHREE SARVODAYA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,VADODARA vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DY. CIT, CICLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment being bad in law, illegal and non-est.. 2.00 Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80P of the Act amounting

SANGATH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved with the reassessment order, the assessee preferred appeal

ITO,WARD-6(1)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. JANAKBAI DHARAMSHIBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas all the Cross Objections of the Assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

reassessment order of M/s. V. Nitin” which was found to be correct. The copy of the assessment order of M/SV. Nitin furnished by the appellant shows no addition made on account of disallowance

ITO,WARD-6(1)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. JANAKBHAI DHARAMSHIBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas all the Cross Objections of the Assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

reassessment order of M/s. V. Nitin” which was found to be correct. The copy of the assessment order of M/SV. Nitin furnished by the appellant shows no addition made on account of disallowance

ITO,WARD-6(1)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. JANAKBHAI DHARAMSHIBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas all the Cross Objections of the Assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

reassessment order of M/s. V. Nitin” which was found to be correct. The copy of the assessment order of M/SV. Nitin furnished by the appellant shows no addition made on account of disallowance

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowed attributable expenses of Rs. Rs. 36,97,501/- that he allowed while framing the reassessment order dated 30.03.2022. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. AO have