DEEP SUDHIRBHAI SHETH (LEGAL HEIR OF SUDHIR HIMMATLAL SHETH),AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokarasstt. Year: 2016-17 Deep Sudhirbhai Sheth (Legal Heirs Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) Of Sudhir Himmatlal Sheth) Vs. Ahmedabad. Prop. Subhlaxmi Jewellers 3, Khodiyar Shopping Centre Nr.Ishanpur Bus Stand Ishanpur, Ahmedabad. Pan : Ainps 3786 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarnai, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

reassessment cannot be initiated against a dead person and that section 159 mandates issuance of notice to the legal representative

LATE SHRI RANJITSINH BHAWANSINH VAGHELA THRU L/H BHARATSINH R. VAGHELA,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, GANDHINAGAR

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment order is void ab initio. In view of section 159(1) and (3), the proper course is to set aside

J. P. MARKETING MEHSANA,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, MEHSANA

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

sections": [ "147", "250(6)", "176(3)", "189", "45", "159" ], "issues": "Whether reassessment proceedings and additions made in the name of a partnership

SMT. HANSABEN VINODBHAI PARMAR LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODBHAI MOTIBHAI PARMAR,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

section 159 does not provide for any annulment of assessment, reassessment or recomputation but expressly provides for continuance of proceedings

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

MAHESH D.TEKCHANDANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vs. Mahesh Tekchandani, Income-Tax Officer, 67, Shivalik Bungalows, Ward-3(3)(3), Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad Pan : Aespt 5350 A अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Siddhartha Nautiyal: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.10.2023, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1.1 The Order Passed By U/S.250 Passed On 20.10.2023 By Cit(A)-Nfac Delhi Upholding The Addition Of Rs.28,72,000/- Made By A.O. Is Wholly Illegal, Unlawful & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. 1.2 The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That The First Payment By Cheque Was Made On 03.02.2014 & The Final Purchase Deed Was Executed In Fy 2018-19. But No Evidence Pointed Out By Ao To Prove That The Alleged Cash Payment Was Made During The Previous Year Relevant To A.Y. 2012-13. 2 Mahesh D. Tekchandani Vs. Ito Ay : 2012-13

159 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.), the ITAT held that in case of assessment made on assessee consequent to search in another case, Assessing Officer is bound to issue notice under Section 153C and thereafter proceed to assess income under Section 153A, and if Assessing Officer had proceeded with reassessment

PRASANNA PRABHAKARAN L/H OF LATE VASAVA PANICKER PRABHAKARAN KAVINTAVADAKKADATH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2013-14

159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. (2) For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section

VIJAYBHAI LAXMICHAND DEMLA L/H OF LATE SHRI LAXMICHAND PAHLUMAL DEMLA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

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

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

159 of the IT Act and assessee's legal heir is deemed to be an assessee in this case. 5. The assessee's legal heir has failed to furnish any details like nature of income earned, details of bank account(s), details of cash deposits made in the bank account(s), sources of cash deposits, details of cash deposits made

SHREEJI DEVELOPERS,VADODARA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SURAT AT VADODARA, VADODARA

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

159 taxmann.com 178 held that where\nmore than three years had expired from the end of assessment year 2018-\n19, sanctioning authority under Section 151 (u) should have been\nPrincipal Chief Commissioner and not Principal Commissioner and,\nthus, order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148 issued on\nbasis of approval granted by Principal Commissioner were

DHAVAL DILIPKUMAR THAKKAR LEGAL HEIR OF LATE DILIPKUMAR AMRUTLAL THAKKAR,KHEDA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 NADIAD FORMERLY WARD-2, NADIAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 787/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dhaval Dilipkumar Thakkar, बनाम Income Tax Officer, L/H Of Late Shri Dilipkumar Ward-1, Nadiad Vs. Amrutlal Thakkar, (Formerly Ito, Ward-2, At Narsanda, Gujarat-388120 Nadiad) Pan : Akxpt 6003 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Hrishikesh Hemant Patki, Sr Dr ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By: सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short Referred To As “The Act”] Dated 12.09.2023 Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Follows :- “1. The Ld. A.O. Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Issuing Order U/S 143(3) In The Name Of Dead Person. The Notice So Issued Is Illegal/And Invalid In Law. The Order Passed Consequent To Such Illegal/Invalid Notice Is Prayed To Be Quashed. 2. Without Prejudice To The Other Grounds, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. A.O. Making Addition Of Cash Deposited Of Rs. 13,00,000/- During Demonetization Period. Thus, The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law & Therefore The Appeal Of The Appellant Be Allowed.”

159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. (2) For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section

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

reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction as deposit in a bank account by itself does not constitute “reason to believe” that income has I.T.A No. 1105 & 1106/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 8 Late Ashvinbhai Umedbhai Patel (deceased) By Legal Heir Smit Ashvinbhai Patel vs. ITO escaped assessment, relying on binding judicial precedents. The Counsel therefore prayed that the assessment and penalty orders

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

reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction as deposit in a bank account by itself does not constitute “reason to believe” that income has I.T.A No. 1105 & 1106/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 8 Late Ashvinbhai Umedbhai Patel (deceased) By Legal Heir Smit Ashvinbhai Patel vs. ITO escaped assessment, relying on binding judicial precedents. The Counsel therefore prayed that the assessment and penalty orders

DALPAT BARAIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

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

159 taxmann.com 178 held that where more than three years had expired from the end of assessment year 2018-19, sanctioning authority under section 151 (ii) should have been Principal Chief Commissioner and not Principal Commissioner and, thus, order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 issued on basis of approval granted by Principal Commissioner were

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

159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) (B) Reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction: – The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the cases were reopened merely on the basis of the details received from the FT&TR Division of CBDT and there was no independent application of mind by the AO. He submitted that the reopening 25 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page