SHRI SHENALMA GAUSHALA TRUST,BANASKANTHA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed for statistical\npurposes

Exemption) in the course of the reassessment of its applications.\n15. In the combined result, both appeals are allowed for statistical

SHRI SHENALMA GAUSHALA TRUST,BANASKANTHA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed for statistical\npurposes

Exemption) in the course of the reassessment of its applications.\n15.\nIn the combined result, both appeals are allowed for statistical

INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SURESHKUMAR BHIKALAL THAKKER, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed

exempt capital gains.\n4. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that\nthe assessee had shown sale of shares

RAHUL MONAL CHOKSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION : THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

exemption u/s. 54F of the Act and no documentary proof filed and no details of depositing the sale consideration in Capital Gains Account Scheme. Thus computed the long term capital gain and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved against the reassessment

PURNIMA ADVERTISING AGENCY P.LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

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

reassessment the assessing officer noticed that assessee has earned exempt income of Rs. 99,49,545/- u/s. 10(2A) during

DHANVIDHYA MULTISALES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the assessee succeeds on legal ground towards validity of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

Exemption) [2018] 92 taxmann.com 74 (Gujarat) for the proposition that reassessment notice for mere verification or for fishing enquiry is not permissible

BHAVNA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the assessee succeeds on legal ground towards validity of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1454/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06)

Exemption) [2018] 92 taxmann.com 74 (Gujarat) for the proposition that reassessment notice for mere verification or for fishing enquiry is ITA No.1454/Ahd/2016

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

exempt status and passed orders accordingly. 4.2 For A.Y. 2016-17, reassessment proceedings were initiated u/s 147, based on information

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

exempt status and passed orders accordingly. 4.2 For A.Y. 2016-17, reassessment proceedings were initiated u/s 147, based on information

RUSHINA VIKRAM DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. WARD 3(3)(2), INCOME TAX OFFICER, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

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

exempt u/s. 10(1)/10(37) of the Act. Whereas the issue in reassessment order is addition of Rs.50,91,233/- as the loan

DANABHAI BHARVAD,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) In Turn Has Arisen From The Assessment Order Dated 28-11- 2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act 1961. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With Tribunal, Reads As Under:- “1. The Assessing Officer & Commissioner Appeal Have Erred In Law & In Facts, In Considering The Cash Deposit As Un-Explained Cash Deposit.

exempt income u/s 10(1), which got taxed owing to an exparte best judgment reassessment order u/s 144 read with

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) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Assessee, engaged in business of solid waste management, claimed exemption under section 80-IA which

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) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Assessee, engaged in business of solid waste management, claimed exemption under section 80-IA which

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) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Assessee, engaged in business of solid waste management, claimed exemption under section 80-IA which

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) - Assessment year 2012-13 - Assessee, engaged in business of solid waste management, claimed exemption under section 80-IA which

RAJNIKANT RAICHAND SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and rightly completed under law. The CIT(Appeals) observed that the assessee not only failed to explain the revised stand on capital gain exemptions

OVEZ ARIFBHAI LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

exempt income u/s 10(38). The AO accepted the contentions of the assessee, and vide reassessment framed by the AO , the returned

MANISHKUMAR RAMLAKHAN AGRAWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. WARD 6(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, impugned notice is quashed

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

reassessment proceedings, the assessee filed the statement of Long Term Capital Gains, purchase and sale of equity shares of Kushal Ltd. and claimed exemption