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)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance made u/s

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)

reassessment orders passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. Since common issue of challenging the reopening of assessment, disallowance made u/s

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

AARAV FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

disallowed. 10.2.3.2 Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the assesses was asked during assessment proceedings various queries relating to its claim u/s 801B/IC of the 1. T. Act, 1961. 10.3.0 The assessee was asked to justify the following during the course of assessment proceedings: i. Justification of claim u/s. 80IB/IC ii. Details of products manufactured u/s. 80IB/1C

DARED SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,BHAVANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Separate Appellate

reassessment order:- “6. Assessed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act,1961. Computation of income and demand notice u/s 156 of the Act is attached.” It is an admitted fact that the assessee never filed its return of income u/s 139(1) of the 1961 Act, and the only return of income filed by the assessee

DARED SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,BHAVNAGAR, GUJARAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Separate Appellate

reassessment order:- “6. Assessed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act,1961. Computation of income and demand notice u/s 156 of the Act is attached.” It is an admitted fact that the assessee never filed its return of income u/s 139(1) of the 1961 Act, and the only return of income filed by the assessee

URMIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income u/s 14A w.r.t. rule 8D. Since, the assessee has under reported income in view of provisions of section 270A(2)(a) of Income Tax Act 1961. (Addition of Rs.83,35,408/-)” 10. It is also seen from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer has not recorded his dissatisfaction as prescribed under Section

URMIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income u/s 14A w.r.t. rule 8D. Since, the assessee has under reported income in view of provisions of section 270A(2)(a) of Income Tax Act 1961. (Addition of Rs.83,35,408/-)” 10. It is also seen from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer has not recorded his dissatisfaction as prescribed under Section

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

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

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

147. No new material/tangible material has been brought on record by AO which justify such reassessment notice and on the contrary, re-computation is made based upon facts already on the record of AO. Thus, issuance of notice for alleged escapement of income by making re-computation of disallowance u/s

THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Disallowance u/s. 14A: 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of AO in making disallowance by invoking the provision of section 14A of the Act and also in directing the AO to recalculate the amount of disallowance as per Rule

GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Disallowance u/s. 14A: 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of AO in making disallowance by invoking the provision of section 14A of the Act and also in directing the AO to recalculate the amount of disallowance as per Rule

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Disallowance u/s. 14A: 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of AO in making disallowance by invoking the provision of section 14A of the Act and also in directing the AO to recalculate the amount of disallowance as per Rule

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

147 of the Act rws 151 is solicited. Dt: 28.03.2016 (B.P. SRIVASTAVA) DCIT, CC-2(2), Ahd. Clause 11: Whether the Pr.CIT is satisfied on the reason recorded by the A.O. that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice u/s. 148. Yes, I am satisfied that it is a fait case. Dated: 29.03.2016 (M.K. DUBEY

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

147 of the Act rws 151 is solicited. Dt: 28.03.2016 (B.P. SRIVASTAVA) DCIT, CC-2(2), Ahd. Clause 11: Whether the Pr.CIT is satisfied on the reason recorded by the A.O. that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice u/s. 148. Yes, I am satisfied that it is a fait case. Dated: 29.03.2016 (M.K. DUBEY

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

147 of the Act rws 151 is solicited. Dt: 28.03.2016 (B.P. SRIVASTAVA) DCIT, CC-2(2), Ahd. Clause 11: Whether the Pr.CIT is satisfied on the reason recorded by the A.O. that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice u/s. 148. Yes, I am satisfied that it is a fait case. Dated: 29.03.2016 (M.K. DUBEY