ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. LEELA GREENSHIP RECYCLING PRIVATE LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of above directions

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 2111/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Leela Greenship Recycling Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Office No.303, 3Rd Floor, बनाम/ Commissioner V/S. B Wing, Leela Efcee, Of Income Tax, Near Aksharwadi Temple, Circle-1, Waghawadi Road, Bhavnagar. Bhavnagar-364002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aagcg8956L

u/s 69C of the Act, without appreciating the facts of the case? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee engaged into transaction being bogus entries with Mahadev Trading Co., which was merely paper company and had no actual business

LEELA GREENSHIP RECYCLING PVT. LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes in terms of above directions

u/s 69C of the\nAct, without appreciating the facts of the case?\n2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the\nld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee engaged into\ntransaction being bogus entries with Mahadev Trading Co., which was merely\npaper company and had no actual business?\nITA

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the above ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 4. The learned CIT(E) erred in fact and in law in invoking revision power u/s 263 of the Act on an issue of allowability of exemption u/s 11 of the Act despite the fact that proceeding u/s 263 cannot be initiated on debatable issue. Gujarat Technological University vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year

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)

147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 dated 29/03/2022 as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and directing the Ld. Assessing Officer to make fresh assessment, by passing the Order u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 26/02/2024. 2. Your appellant craves leave to add, to alter or to amend the grounds of appeal if occasion

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 147 of the Act." 4.2 Further, reliance is also placed on the following judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court of Gujarat which have been delivered on similar set of facts:- (i) Kaushaliya Shampatlal Dudani - 129 taxmann.com 48 {2021} (Guj) (ii) Vilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF - 129 taxmann.com 68 (2021) (Guj) (iii) Bhanuben Mansukhlal Khimasthria - 119 taxmann.com

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 147 of the Act." 4.2 Further, reliance is also placed on the following judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court of Gujarat which have been delivered on similar set of facts:- (i) Kaushaliya Shampatlal Dudani - 129 taxmann.com 48 {2021} (Guj) (ii) Vilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF - 129 taxmann.com 68 (2021) (Guj) (iii) Bhanuben Mansukhlal Khimasthria - 119 taxmann.com

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 147 of the Act." 4.2 Further, reliance is also placed on the following judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court of Gujarat which have been delivered on similar set of facts:- (i) Kaushaliya Shampatlal Dudani - 129 taxmann.com 48 {2021} (Guj) (ii) Vilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF - 129 taxmann.com 68 (2021) (Guj) (iii) Bhanuben Mansukhlal Khimasthria - 119 taxmann.com

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HINDVA BUILDERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 147 of the Act." 4.2 Further, reliance is also placed on the following judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court of Gujarat which have been delivered on similar set of facts:- (i) Kaushaliya Shampatlal Dudani - 129 taxmann.com 48 {2021} (Guj) (ii) Vilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF - 129 taxmann.com 68 (2021) (Guj) (iii) Bhanuben Mansukhlal Khimasthria - 119 taxmann.com

PARESHBHAI RAMESHBHAI PANCHAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-Assessment Year : 2010-11 Pareshbhai Rameshbhai Panchal, Income Tax Officer, 1017, Nariyawad Ni Pole, Vs Ward-1(2)(5), Lunsawad, Dariapur, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380001 Pan : Atepp 2563 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Shah, Ar & Shri Aman Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Umesh Agarwal, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad (“Cit(A)” In Short) Dated 16.11.2018 Whereby He Confirmed The Addition Of Rs.8,65,200/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Short Term Capital Gain Earned By The Assessee From The Transactions In Shares.

u/s 144 of the Income tax Act, 1961. Since the assessee could not' submit the above documents at the time of assessment which resulted into ex-party assessment and has created lot of hardship without his fault and circumstances beyond his control. We request you to admit the copy of the ledger account of the assessee from the books

NITABEN GIRISHBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, while upholding the validity of reopening, we set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) on merits and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Nitaben Girishbhai Patel The Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) 33/B, Swi Park, Private Plot Vejalpur Madhuvrund Society Ahmedabad. Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aappp 5738 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Assessee By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

147 of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both in law and on facts, in confirming the addition of Rs.13,78,078/ - made by Ld. AO under section 69A of the Act. 4. Both, AO & CIT(A), have erred in passing the impugned orders without properly appreciating facts of the case, submissions of the assessee and documentary

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. MRUNAL SANTRAMDAS VERMA,, AHMEDABAD

172 (Gujarat), wherein the High Court held that when the ground on which reopening of assessment was based, no addition was made by Assessing Officer, he could not make additions on some other grounds which did not form part of reasons recorded by him. The counsel for the assessee submitted that no additions were made in respect of those issues

CHOKSI RANCHHODLAL KISHORDAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: us, A.Y. 2013-14, in the case of the assessee. According to the Ld. PCIT, the reasons for which the case of the assessee was reopened was not properly inquired into by the AO and, therefore, the assessment order, according to him, was erroneous causing prejudice to the Revenue for not having made any addition on account of income which was believed to have escaped assessment in the case of the assessee. The reopening, it transpires, was resorted to on finding that the assessee had received

147 dated 29.03.2022 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue by invoking the provision of sec.263 of the Act and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to pass fresh assessment order after examining the issue discussed in the order passed u/s.263 of the Act. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeal