THE JANSEVA TRUST,GODHRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1)(2), VADODARA (NOW INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, GODHRA), GODHRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the above directions

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.851/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Janseva Trust The Ito बनाम/ Opp. Gyandeep School Ward-4(1)(1)(2), Vadodara V/S. Nr.Jivanlal Hospital (Now Ito, Ward-1, Godhra – 389 001 (Gujarat) Godhra – 389 001) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaatt 2888 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Nikhita Bhamblani & Amrin Pathan, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 29.08.2023, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The Said Appeal Arises From The Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Ito), Ward 4(1)(2), Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”], Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act)”], On 24.12.2019. The Janseva Trust Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

271F of the Act. 19. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act. 20. Your appellant craves the right to add to or alter, amend, substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal. 5. During the course of the hearing before us, the Authorized

VISHWAS COMODITY,PATAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PATAN

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2013-14

reassessment order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Condonation of delay 3 1,18,10,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A and taxed the same under section 115BBE. Penalty proceedings under sections 271(1)(c), 271F

MR. KANTILAL LAXMICHAND JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. 2. Ground No. 2 Incorrect disposal of Appeal by Hon'ble CIT(A) by applying provisions of section 249(4) of the Act 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant respectfully submits that Hon'ble CIT(A) grossly erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant

MR. KANTILAL LAXMICHAND JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

reassessment proceedings are bad in law. 2. Ground No. 2 Incorrect disposal of Appeal by Hon'ble CIT(A) by applying provisions of section 249(4) of the Act 2.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant respectfully submits that Hon'ble CIT(A) grossly erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant

SAROJBEN NATVARBHAI PATEL,CHHOTAUDEPUR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

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

271F of the Act.\n18. The Appellant reserves the right to add, or modify, or substitute, or alter, or\ndelete all or any of the grounds of appeal.\"\nThe brief facts of the case are that the assessing officer received\ninformation that the assessee, Shri Shirishbhai R. Patel, had received cash of\nRs.55,00,000/- on account of a family

LALITABEN DIPAKBHAI MODH,SURAT vs. PCIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

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

reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 715/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Lalitaben Dipakbhai Modh . vs. PCIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual engaged in investment in shares, trading

MINAL PRASHANT VAKIL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE. PRASHANT RASIKLAL VAKIL,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 1, INTERNATIONAL TAX AHMEDABAD , 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)

reassessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, I.T.A No. 1546/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 2 Minal Prashant Vakil Legal Heir of Late Prashant Rasiklal Vakil vs. ITO, Int.Tax 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The brief facts of the case is that

BHAGVANJIBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

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

reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after referred as the Act] relating to the assessment year 2013–14. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the agricultural activities and deriving agricultural I.T.A No. 746/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Bhagvanjibhai

ARVIND SHASHANK HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

reassessment order passed, requires to be\nquashed.\n10. That the assessee has filled his detailed reply on 21/12/2021,\n18/02/2022 and 25/03/2022, however without considering the\ndocumentary evidences on record, A.O. has passed an order u/s 148\nr.w.s.144 on presumption and assumption is against the provision of\nlaw and against the principle of natural justice and as such it requires

GOVINDBHAI BHAVANDAS PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 4(2)(2), AHMEDABAD (EXISTING ITO WARD 4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Who Has Set Aside The Exparte Assessment Order Invoking Section 251(1)(A) Of The Act By Observing As Follows:

reassessment proceedings. 2. That the learned National faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and facts by not quashing the assessment order as notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not been issued and accordingly the order passed by the learned AO is required to be quashed 3. That the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred

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)

271F for non-filing of Return of Income. 3. Aggrieved against the assessment order, the one of the legal heir of the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) specifically raising Ground No. 4 that the Assessing Officer failed to bring on record all the legal Representatives of the deceased assessee. However the Ld. CIT(A) given two opportunities

BHAVINIBEN SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(1) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-1(2)(2)), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

271F of the Act. ITA Nos.548 & 549/Ahd/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Page 3 of 7 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 3. Firstly we are taking up ITA No.548/Ahd/2023 for assessment

BHAVINIBEN SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(1) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-1(2)(2)), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

271F of the Act. ITA Nos.548 & 549/Ahd/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Page 3 of 7 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 3. Firstly we are taking up ITA No.548/Ahd/2023 for assessment