VIKAS VIJAY GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby\ndismissed

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No. 404/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year 2017-18\nVikas Vijay Gupta\nPrincipal Commissioner\n604 Sarap,\nof Income Tax,\nOpp. Navjivan Press Vs Ahmedabad-1,\nP.O. Navjivan,\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad-380014,\nGujarat\n(Respondent)\nPAN: AEOPG6723L\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R.\nRevenue Represented: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT-DR\nDate of hearing : 27-02-2025\nDate of pronouncement : 27-05-2025\nआदे

penalty proceedings u/s.271AAC(1) of the Act\nin respect of addition made u/s.69A of the Act. However in the\nconcluding part of the reassessment

NEETABEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

penalty proceedings in the reassessment order thereby the penalty levied u/s. 271D and 271E are bad in law and relied

NEETABEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

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

penalty proceedings in the reassessment order thereby the penalty levied u/s. 271D and 271E are bad in law and relied

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, BARODA vs. M/S/ AMAR MINING COMPANY,, BARODA

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 1998-99

reassessment proceedings since the assessee firm has not been able to produce the parties from whom purchases were made during the F.Y. 1997-98 relates to A.Y. 1998-99. The appeal preferred by the assessee against the said order was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) on 03.12.2012. On the other hand, the Assessing Officer levied penalty

SHRI GURINDER KAHLON,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty of Rs.1,87,938/- as against the addition of Rs.6,14,178/- and not against Rs.13,25,098/- which is escaped income as per the reassessment

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

penalty on account of erroneous addition of deemed income. It be so held now. 3. The ld NFAC/CIT(A) further grievously erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the very reassessment

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

penalty on account of erroneous addition of deemed income. It be so held now. 3. The ld NFAC/CIT(A) further grievously erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the very reassessment

M/S. PANCHMAHAL STEEL LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the assessment years in question

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings were started and penalty proceedings were also initiated. These were upheld by the Tribunal. On a reference the High

M/S. PANCHMAHAL STEEL LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the assessment years in question

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings were started and penalty proceedings were also initiated. These were upheld by the Tribunal. On a reference the High

SHASHANK SHEKHAR SINGH,,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, BARODA

In the result, ITA No. 924/Ahd/2016 appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

reassessment order. For the reason stated above, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. ITA No. 2878/Ahd/2017 is a penalty

SHASHANK SHEKHAR SINGH,,NEW DELHI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-7,, BARODA

In the result, ITA No. 924/Ahd/2016 appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No

reassessment order. For the reason stated above, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. ITA No. 2878/Ahd/2017 is a penalty

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Draipl-Kskel (Jv) Ito, Ward-9(2) 2Nd Floor, “Msk” Vs. Ahmedabad. Passport Office To Panjarapole Rd. Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaad 3825 B (Applicant) (Responent)

penalty order to the file of the Assessing Officer to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with the outcome of the quantum reassessment

VISHAL INFRAGLOBAL PVT. LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.2080/Ahd/2024 & 2081/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vishal Infraglobal Pvt.Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ Plot No.42, 2Nd Floor Gandhinagar Circle V/S. Apple Avenue Gandhinagar B/H. Dharti Flats Gayatri Temple, Highway Mehsana – 384 002 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecv 2187 J अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01 /04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

penalty in light of the final outcome of the reassessment proceedings. 7.3. The assessee is directed to co-operate fully

VISHAL INFRAGLOBAL PVT. LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.2080/Ahd/2024 & 2081/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vishal Infraglobal Pvt.Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ Plot No.42, 2Nd Floor Gandhinagar Circle V/S. Apple Avenue Gandhinagar B/H. Dharti Flats Gayatri Temple, Highway Mehsana – 384 002 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecv 2187 J अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01 /04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

penalty in light of the final outcome of the reassessment proceedings. 7.3. The assessee is directed to co-operate fully

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD, VADODARA

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

penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of Assessing

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 353, 354, 355, 356 & 357/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

penalty proceedings. 8.1 The assessee has challenged the validity of reassessment on multiple legal grounds that the reasons recorded are identical

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

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of Assessing

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

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of Assessing

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: The Itat Ahmedabad Vide Ita No. 3289/Ahd/2002 & 3343/Ahd/2002. Addition On Account Of Profit On Sale Of Depb For The Purpose Of Rs.11,41,480 Deduction U/S.80Ia Deduction U/S.115Jb(2) In Respect Of Book Losses Of Pradeep Drug Rs.3, 39,12,399

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(l)(c), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of Assessing