M R PATEL AND SONS,SOUTH TOWER,AMBLI BOPAL ROAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN (VEJALPUR),NR SACHIN TOWER,ANANDNAGAR PRAHLADNAGAR ROAD,AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

TDS. Thus the reason recorded for reopening of assessment itself failed, but the Ld PCIT revised the reassessment order on the ground

RUPINDER SINGH DUGGAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment was completed as follows: Information Amount of Source submitted Description Transaction during Enquiry u/s. Amount (Rs.) 148A(c) of the Act TDS

LIKHMI CHAND SHARMA,BHARATPUR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(7), VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyallikhmi Chand Sharma, Income Tax Officer, Vs. C/O. Jngoyal & Company, Ward 4 (1)(7), C-162, Ranjeet Nagar, Vadodara Bharatpur, Rajasthan-321001 [Pan :Bsrps 8059 R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 16.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.09.2025

TDS accordingly, while the assessee had declared significantly lower income, resulting in a refund claim. Based on this discrepancy, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment

BHAVESH K SHAH,AKOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(1), ALKAPURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings, observed that the assessee had purchased a property for ₹1.35 crore, out of which a sum of ₹1,04,86,000/- (including TDS

BINITABEN SANDIPKUMAR PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE PR.CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Sejalben Patel The Pr.Cit-1 1049, Kantvalue Faliyu Vs. Vadodara. At & Po-Karkhadi Tal. Padra, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Drhpp 9550 D Asstt.Year : 2018-19 Binitaben Sandipkumar Patel The Pr.Cit-1 Javla, Chotra Pase Vs. Vadodara. Savli, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Cwopp 4609 Q (Applicant) (Responent)

reassessment (u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B) 7 Assessed Income Rs.90,350/- (same Rs.1,10,350/- as returned) (same as returned) ITA No.701 & 702/Ahd/2025 4 8 TDS

SEJALBEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE PR.CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Sejalben Patel The Pr.Cit-1 1049, Kantvalue Faliyu Vs. Vadodara. At & Po-Karkhadi Tal. Padra, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Drhpp 9550 D Asstt.Year : 2018-19 Binitaben Sandipkumar Patel The Pr.Cit-1 Javla, Chotra Pase Vs. Vadodara. Savli, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Cwopp 4609 Q (Applicant) (Responent)

reassessment (u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B) 7 Assessed Income Rs.90,350/- (same Rs.1,10,350/- as returned) (same as returned) ITA No.701 & 702/Ahd/2025 4 8 TDS

SHRI RUSHABHDEV SWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar&Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

reassessment Shri Rushabhdev Swetambar Murtipujak Jain Sanghvs.ITO(E) Asst.Year –2012-13 - 4– proceedings void ab initio. It was further contended that all income, expenditure, bank transactions, and TDS

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. REGISTRAR GUJRAT UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

reassessment, made an addition of Rs.38,72,56,429/- u/s 69 of the Act as unexplained investments, primarily based on data from Form 26AS, Insight Portal, and TDS

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GOPI SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABA

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

TDS u/s.194A of the Act. 3. The AO has not accepted the above explanation of the assessee and added the unsecured loans as unexplained income of the assessee and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved against the reassessment

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

TDS is required to be deducted on payments made to such Boards. 4.1 For A.Y. 2014-15 and 2018-19, the Department accepted the assessee’s exempt status and passed orders accordingly. 4.2 For A.Y. 2016-17, reassessment

GUJARAT STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

TDS is required to be deducted on payments made to such Boards. 4.1 For A.Y. 2014-15 and 2018-19, the Department accepted the assessee’s exempt status and passed orders accordingly. 4.2 For A.Y. 2016-17, reassessment

ANMOL MEDICARE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalanmol Medicare Limited, Acit, Vs. 2Nd Floor, Nbcc House, Circle 1(1)(1), Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-38006 Ahmedabad [Pan : Aafca 1055 R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Rajenkumar M. Vasavda, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.09.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

reassessment on 16.12.2019, determining the total income at Rs. 23,62,660/-, making the following additions/disallowances::- i. Disallowance u/s 43B of the Act - Rs. 97,481/- ii. Disallowance of interest on late - Rs. 51,587/- Payment of TDS

MARUTI MULTICHEM PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(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)

reassessment order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that the loan of Rs.50 lakhs from M/s. DPCL were taken through banking channels, interest was paid to the lender with appropriate TDS

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD vs. SUNPOINT TRADING LIMITED, MEMNAGAR, AHMEDABAD

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

reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the said amount was not a fresh loan advanced during the year but was in fact a repayment by M/s Shankar Growth Fund Private Limited of the loan earlier advanced to it during F.Y. 2016–17 (A.Y. 2017–18). The assessee submitted ledger accounts, bank statements, Form 26AS, TDS

SHREENATHJI ASSOCIATES ,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Reassessment) Assessment) Return Filing 24.08.2013 30.10.2014 14.05.2019 Date (Revised: 16.03.2016) Income Rs. 22,20,161 Rs. 14,89,280 Rs. 14,89,280 Declared by the Assessee Assessment U/S 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) r.w.s. 147 Order Date (AO) 04.03.2016 29.11.2016 16.12.2019 Additions Made Brokerage Differential Differential by AO (Sec 37): Value of Land Value of Land

SHREENATHJI ASSOCIATES,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Reassessment) Assessment) Return Filing 24.08.2013 30.10.2014 14.05.2019 Date (Revised: 16.03.2016) Income Rs. 22,20,161 Rs. 14,89,280 Rs. 14,89,280 Declared by the Assessee Assessment U/S 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) r.w.s. 147 Order Date (AO) 04.03.2016 29.11.2016 16.12.2019 Additions Made Brokerage Differential Differential by AO (Sec 37): Value of Land Value of Land

SHREENATHJI ASSOCIATES,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.592, 593 & 594/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15 Respectively Shreenathji Associates The Ito बनाम/ Sb-1, Shreeji Avenue, W#Ard-1(2)(4) V/S. 11, Sampatrao Colony Vadodara – 390 007 Jetalpur Road Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abufs 4107 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise From The Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Dated 11/05/2023, 30/11/2023 & 02/02/2024 Respectively For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 (Both Under Original & Reassessment Proceedings). Since The Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Common, They Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Reassessment) Assessment) Return Filing 24.08.2013 30.10.2014 14.05.2019 Date (Revised: 16.03.2016) Income Rs. 22,20,161 Rs. 14,89,280 Rs. 14,89,280 Declared by the Assessee Assessment U/S 143(3) 143(3) 143(3) r.w.s. 147 Order Date (AO) 04.03.2016 29.11.2016 16.12.2019 Additions Made Brokerage Differential Differential by AO (Sec 37): Value of Land Value of Land

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