SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

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

reassessment or recomputation may be taken. 33.1 The provisions of subsection (1) of section 150 of the Act overrides the time limit provided under subsection 149 of the Act for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act, for making assessment or assessment in consequence to any finding given by the appellate authority under

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

reassessment or recomputation may be taken. 33.1 The provisions of subsection (1) of section 150 of the Act overrides the time limit provided under subsection 149 of the Act for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act, for making assessment or assessment in consequence to any finding given by the appellate authority under

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 2841 & 2842/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 204-05 Gujarat State Electricity The Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Circle-1(1) V/S. Sardar Patel Vidhyut Bhavan Baroda Race Course Circle Alkapuri, Baroda – 390 007 (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (&' यथ$/ Respondent) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacg 6864 F

reassessed u/s 143(3) of the Act read with section 254 of the Act. The assessee preferred appeals against the order

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 2841 & 2842/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 204-05 Gujarat State Electricity The Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Circle-1(1) V/S. Sardar Patel Vidhyut Bhavan Baroda Race Course Circle Alkapuri, Baroda – 390 007 (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (&' यथ$/ Respondent) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacg 6864 F

reassessed u/s 143(3) of the Act read with section 254 of the Act. The assessee preferred appeals against the order

ABDULVAHED A. SHEIKH, LEGAL HEIROF LATE SMT. SARIFABEN BIKHUBHAI SHEK,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

reassessment could never be waived for the simple reason that jurisdiction could neither be waived nor created by consent. In the concurring judgment his Lordship, Beg. J., at page 2077, also pointed out that if the notice under s. 7(2) was a condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction to make the best judment assessment, the doctrine of waiver

SHRI DHANESH P.SONI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

reassessment or recomputation is made on the assessee or any person in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order under section 250, section 254

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI MEHUL PRATAP ASNANI,, AHMEDABAD

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s cross objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं. / I.T.A. Nos. 3133/Ahd/2015 & 1659/Ahd/14 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2010-11)

reassessment or re-computation is made on the assesse or any person in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order, under sections 250, 254

ASHAPURA STONE INDUSTRIES,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, ANAND

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, with directions as above

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-2013 Ashapura Stone Industries The Ito, Ward-1 1, Nh No.8, Vasad Vs. Anand. Nr.Geb Sub-Station Anand-388 306, Gujarat Pan : Aaufa 6762 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025

section 250 r.w.s. 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2012–13. 2. Brief Facts 2.1 The assessee is engaged in the business of quarrying and trading in stone products. In the course of reassessment

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

section 254 of the Act. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee has failed to discharge its obligation during the reassessment

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate

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

254,994.56 45.6844 11649273 2001-02 3110.04 47.6919 148324 2002-03 4766.93 48.3953 230697 2003-04 3585.58 45.9516 164763 2004-05 2667.69 44.9315 119863 2005-06 145,526.01 44.2735 6442946 2006-07 93,038.14 45.2849 4213223 2007-08 22989.11 40.241 925105 2008-09 2824.59 45.917 129697 4.2 The exchange rate taken into consideration is the average exchange rate