THE KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO.-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

154 proposing to withdraw the interest is void. The return for AY 2011-12 was selected for scrutiny, and an order under section 143(3) was passed on 5th March 2014, raising a demand of ₹1.67 crore. This demand was adjusted against a refund due for AY 2009-10. Subsequently, The Kalupur Commercial Co.op. Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT Asst.Year

SHRI MUKESH R.SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

reassessment was made under section 147 of the Act vide order dated 31.12.2007 which was further rectified by the AO vide order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 12.2.2008. Both these orders of the AO were upheld by the CIT(A), against which the ITA No.736/Ahd/2005 and 6 Others Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah and Another Vs. ACIT 3

SHRI MUKESH R.SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENT.WARD-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

reassessment was made under section 147 of the Act vide order dated 31.12.2007 which was further rectified by the AO vide order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 12.2.2008. Both these orders of the AO were upheld by the CIT(A), against which the ITA No.736/Ahd/2005 and 6 Others Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah and Another Vs. ACIT 3

SHRI MUKESH R.SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

reassessment was made under section 147 of the Act vide order dated 31.12.2007 which was further rectified by the AO vide order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 12.2.2008. Both these orders of the AO were upheld by the CIT(A), against which the ITA No.736/Ahd/2005 and 6 Others Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah and Another Vs. ACIT 3

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENT.WARD-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Suchitra Kambleasstt Year - 2001-02

reassessment was made under section 147 of the Act vide order dated 31.12.2007 which was further rectified by the AO vide order passed under section 154 of the Act dated 12.2.2008. Both these orders of the AO were upheld by the CIT(A), against which the ITA No.736/Ahd/2005 and 6 Others Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah and Another Vs. ACIT 3

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions of section 145(3), rejected the books of account, and applied a gross profit rate of 12.5%. In appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the rejection

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions of section 145(3), rejected the books of account, and applied a gross profit rate of 12.5%. In appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the rejection

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions of section 145(3), rejected the books of account, and applied a gross profit rate of 12.5%. In appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the rejection

ARVINDKUMAR AMULKH TANNA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (3), AHMEADABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

154 10,99,43,284 2,97,34,926 2,79,81,468 8,52,11,191 3,44,69,278 153A in Rs. Since the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeal in part, the Revenue is in appeal(s) before us, and the assessee filed two appeals and Cross Objections. Following are the grounds: 3. Grounds raised by the Revenue

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

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

reassessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act relating to the same Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 1001 & 1002/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Parvindar Indar Singh vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

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

reassessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act relating to the same Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 1001 & 1002/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Parvindar Indar Singh vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three\nby the assessee, stand dismissed

147 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of\nthe case, the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and in not\npermissible either in law or on facts.\n2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of\nthe Ld. AO in rejecting books of accounts u/s. 145(3

HASMUKHBHAI MOHANLAL SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years:2017-18

3)/144 was made. However, the Explanation-3 to section 234A stipulates that where assessment is made for the first time u/s 147 or u/s 153A of the Act, the assessment so made shall be regarded as regular assessment for the purpose of this section. In the present case, the assessment was made for the first time u/s 153C

THE UNITED BUILDERS CORPORATION ,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

3 (SC)\nCharters Spped P Ltd Tax Appeal 126 of 2015\nJay Ace Technologies Ltd. 154 taxman.com 45 (SC)\nJPM Tools Ltd. 154 taxmann.com 44 (Delhi)\nArguments on behalf of the Department\nThe persons whose statements have been recorded by the\nDepartment during the proceedings have already accepted the part in\nthe plat Since they me moved in the process

THE MODERN CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(4), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

3 (SC)\nCharters Spped P Ltd Tax Appeal 126 of 2015\nJay Ace Technologies Ltd. 154 taxman.com 45 (SC)\nJPM Tools Ltd. 154 taxmann.com 44 (Delhi)\nArguments on behalf of the Department\nThe persons whose statements have been recorded by the\nDepartment during the proceedings have already accepted the part in\nthe plat Since they me moved in the process

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRECLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

3) The provisions of sub-section (2) shall also apply in relation to a case where an assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred by him in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under this Act: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section

SHAIVAL COMCON LLP,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

u/s 144 of the Act, and the entire investment amount of ₹4,50,00,000/- was treated as unexplained income under Section 69 of the Act and brought to tax under Section 115BBE of the Act. The total income of the assessee was computed at ₹4,50,00,000/-, as against “nil” income previously declared by the assessee

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

3) The provisions of sub-section (2) shall also apply in relation to a case where an assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred by him in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under this Act: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

3) The provisions of sub-section (2) shall also apply in relation to a case where an assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred by him in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under this Act: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section