M/S. NANDAN EXIM LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roynandam Exim Limited, Vs. Dcit, Survey No.198, 203/2, Saijpur – Circle – 3(1)(1), Gopalpur, Pirana Road, Piplaj Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad – 382 405. [Pan No. Aaacn 5327 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) ..

reassessment proceedings deserves to be quashed. Further that, it is a settled principle of law that no action shall be taken u/s 147 of the Act after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part

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

u/s 148 therefore cannot arise where the person concerned has no knowledge of the proceeding initiated. Being a jurisdictional notice, these defects cannot be termed as mere irregularities which can be cured by participation of the assesses/legal heirs, even as per the aforementioned decisions of the jurisdictional High Court.The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of P.V Doshi

YASHODABEN MANEKLAL SONI,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DAHOD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

147 of the I.T. Act. A notice u/s 148 is therefore required to be issued to the assessee.” ITA Nos.359/Ahd/2016 Smt. Yashodaben M. Soni vs. The ITO Asst.Year – 2007-08 On 18.03.2012, the assessee filed a written submission in support of his claim. However, the explanation given by the assessee was not found suitable by the Learned

SHRI HEMANG CHIMANBHAI POKAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 147 of the Act. 6. We find merit in the contention of the Ld.Counsel for the assessee that the assessment order passed by the AO could not be said to be erroneous since the issue of examination of long term capital gain on sale of land was beyond his domain as per section 147

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 353, 354, 355, 356 & 357/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

Depreciation as per para-8 Rs.1,00,973. 6). He has erred in law and facts in confirming the order of A.O. without considering the facts mentioned in the written submission and without referring to the said submission and by wrongly applying the decision of Roshan Di Hattti and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif on the point of burden of proof

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

depreciation allowance' in section 147 after the conditions for 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

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

depreciation allowance' in section 147 after the conditions for 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

GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

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

147 r.ws 1448 of the Act Less: Rs 5,77,40,540/- already disallowed as per Assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act) may kindly be deleted. 8 ITA Nos. 1165 & 1166/Ahd/2025 & ITA Nos.1254 & 1249/Ahd/2025 Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited – A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 ITEM NO.: III Non-granting of addition in closing stock

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

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

147 r.ws 1448 of the Act Less: Rs 5,77,40,540/- already disallowed as per Assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act) may kindly be deleted. 8 ITA Nos. 1165 & 1166/Ahd/2025 & ITA Nos.1254 & 1249/Ahd/2025 Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited – A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 ITEM NO.: III Non-granting of addition in closing stock

GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

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

147 r.ws 1448 of the Act Less: Rs 5,77,40,540/- already disallowed as per Assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act) may kindly be deleted. 8 ITA Nos. 1165 & 1166/Ahd/2025 & ITA Nos.1254 & 1249/Ahd/2025 Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited – A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 ITEM NO.: III Non-granting of addition in closing stock

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

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

147 r.ws 1448 of the Act Less: Rs 5,77,40,540/- already disallowed as per Assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act) may kindly be deleted. 8 ITA Nos. 1165 & 1166/Ahd/2025 & ITA Nos.1254 & 1249/Ahd/2025 Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited – A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 ITEM NO.: III Non-granting of addition in closing stock

SUKIRTI POLYMERS,KHEDA vs. THE PR. CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

depreciation and loans and advances received are genuine from disclosed sources. Hence a notice u/s. 148 was issued on 27-03-2021. 2.1. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee furnished copies of confirmation of unsecured loan from M/s. Anand Infrastructure, Ledger account, copies of ledger account of Mayur Mavji and copies of bank statements as Cosmos Cooperative Bank. Further verification

SHRI NAVINCHANDRA N. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

u/s. 148 for re- opening of assessment is bad in law and entire reassessment proceedings need to be quashed. Reliance is being placed on the following judgments:- i. CIT Vs. M/s. Kelvinator Of India Ltd, (2010) 2 SCC 723 (SC) “On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct

M/S. HARSIDDH QUARRY WORKS,ARAVALLI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.103/Ahd/2022 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 M/S. Harsiddh Quarry Works, Principal Commissioner Of At Alva (Vatrak), Vs. Income Tax, Taluka Bayad, Ahmedabad. District Aravalli, Alva(Vaarak)-383325. Pan: Aaifh0303H

u/s 147 of the Act, can be initiated if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and he may also take into consideration any other income chargeable to tax but escaped assessment during proceedings. This can be better understood through an example, assuming the AO has reason to believe that the assessee

SHRI BIPINKUMAR HIRALAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of the assessee challenging the re-assessment proceedings is allowed

u/s. 147 of the act on the basis of “change of opinion” observed as follows:- “Heard learned counsel on both sides. A short question which arises for determination in this batch of civil appeals is, whether the concept of "change of opinion" stands obliterated with effect from 1st April, 1989, i.e., after substitution of Section 147 of the Income

ITO, WARD-2(2)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. JASMIN JAYENDRABHAI THAKKAR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

u/s 147 of the Act. (KAVITA P. KAUSHIK) Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad.” 17. A perusal of the above reasons would indicate that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment on the ground that the assessee had made deposits in cash aggregating to Rs.1.63 crores. This cash deposit, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer

ITO, WARD-2(2)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. JASMIN JAYENDRABHAI THAKKAR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

u/s 147 of the Act. (KAVITA P. KAUSHIK) Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad.” 17. A perusal of the above reasons would indicate that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment on the ground that the assessee had made deposits in cash aggregating to Rs.1.63 crores. This cash deposit, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer

SHAMA AJAY PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(IT & TP), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shama Ajay Patel, Vs. 2, Chandroday Society, The Cit(It & Tp), Opp. Golden Triangle, Sp Ahmedabad Stadium Road, Navjivan Post, Ahmedabad-380014 Pan : Alxpp 5273 E अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It & Tp), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. "Cit(It & Tp)" For Short] Dated 08.02.2023, In Exercise Of His Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit (It & Tp) Reads As Under:- “1. The Ld. Cit Has Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Without Jurisdiction & Appropriate Powers Available Under The Act. It Is Submitted That The Order Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad In Law As A.O. Has Neither Committed Any Error Nor It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. It Be Held Now.

u/s 147 of the Act on reopening the case of the assessee for the specific reason that the Assessing Officer had information regarding the dubious dealing in shares of M/s. Kushal Limited. Clearly, the scope of reassessment proceedings was confined to the transactions of trading in shares of M/s. 11 Shama Ajay Patel