THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

reassess income under section 147 of the Act is under the obligation to issue a valid notice under section 143(2) of the Act. In case the AO ITA Nos.37-38/AHD/2021 A.Y.s 2008-09 & 2017-18 22 has not done so, the order framed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act becomes invalid. In the present case

SHRI ANILBHAI HIRALAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned six appeals have been filed at the instance of Assessee and Revenue against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred

HIRENKUMAR LAVJIBHAI KANANI,AHMEDABAD vs. PCIT, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

147 of the Act, which were initiated based on the information that the assessee had received unsecured loans/advances from M/s. Yash EPC Projects Pvt. Ltd., where the assessee held a significant shareholding. 3. The reassessment proceedings were initiated for the limited scrutiny purpose of verifying the applicability of the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, which deals

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2010. In other words, assessment was reopened and addition made in re-assessment proceedings travelled to the ld.CIT(A), which have been deleted. The Revenue is aggrieved with those deletions. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 reads as under: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2010. In other words, assessment was reopened and addition made in re-assessment proceedings travelled to the ld.CIT(A), which have been deleted. The Revenue is aggrieved with those deletions. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 reads as under: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2010. In other words, assessment was reopened and addition made in re-assessment proceedings travelled to the ld.CIT(A), which have been deleted. The Revenue is aggrieved with those deletions. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 reads as under: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred

THE ACIT,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2010. In other words, assessment was reopened and addition made in re-assessment proceedings travelled to the ld.CIT(A), which have been deleted. The Revenue is aggrieved with those deletions. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 reads as under: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD),RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.12.2010. In other words, assessment was reopened and addition made in re-assessment proceedings travelled to the ld.CIT(A), which have been deleted. The Revenue is aggrieved with those deletions. The grounds of appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.692/Ahd/2011 reads as under: “1. The ld.CIT(A) erred

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

22-12-2021 Date of pronouncement : 28-01-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad, (in short referred to as CIT(A)), dated 25-10-2017, u/s. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred

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

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The above captioned four appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] all dated 30.01.2024 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) in respect

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The above captioned four appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] all dated 30.01.2024 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) in respect

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The above captioned four appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] all dated 30.01.2024 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) in respect

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

22 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P. Patel & 81 ors. These documents were basically the statement of foreign bank account which should have been available with the assessee himself. Still, when he demanded the copy of the same from the AO, it was provided to him. However, no compliance

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

22 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P. Patel & 81 ors. These documents were basically the statement of foreign bank account which should have been available with the assessee himself. Still, when he demanded the copy of the same from the AO, it was provided to him. However, no compliance

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEHAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

22 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P. Patel & 81 ors. These documents were basically the statement of foreign bank account which should have been available with the assessee himself. Still, when he demanded the copy of the same from the AO, it was provided to him. However, no compliance

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

22 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P. Patel & 81 ors. These documents were basically the statement of foreign bank account which should have been available with the assessee himself. Still, when he demanded the copy of the same from the AO, it was provided to him. However, no compliance