THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

149." 33.2 Without prejudice to the above, it is also pertinent to note that the proceedings in the case on hand were initiated under section 147 of the Act in pursuance to the direction of the learned CIT(A) in the case of the assessment framed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act in the hands

MAHENDRAKUMAR CHUNILAL SANGHVI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 1(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the appeal."

3 Mahendrakumar Chunilal Sanghvi vs. DCIT per Explanation 2 to Clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act, ‘asset’ shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account which exceeds in the form of asset valued at Rs. 50,00,000/- or more or has escaped assessment. Whereas

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MAHENDRAKUMAR CHUNILAL SANGHVI , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

3 Mahendrakumar Chunilal Sanghvi vs. DCIT per Explanation 2 to Clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act, ‘asset’ shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account which exceeds in the form of asset valued at Rs. 50,00,000/- or more or has escaped assessment. Whereas

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEHAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 149(3) based on a judicial precedent that had no occasion to even deal with the same. Regarding the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summary dismissal of SLP against the Brahm Datt case (supra), as relied upon by the assessee, it is only elementary that mere dismissal of an SLP does not amount to a decision