CHIRAG ISHWARBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(6), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1182 & 1192/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Chirag Ishwarbhai Patel, I.T.O., 49 Dharamanth Prabhu Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(6), Near Adishawar Society, Ahmedabad. Nikol Road, Naroda, Ahmedabad.

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, relevant to the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That the learned C1T(A) has erred in law and fact by not quashing he assessment order, as the learned AO has not complied the provisions of section 147 of the Act and further that

JATINKUMAR PATEL,CHHATRAL KALOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 1, MEHSANA, MEHSANA

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

Bench: Dr. B.R.R Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

u/s 263 as well as consequential orders passed subsequent to revision proceeding are Null and VOID and deserves to be quashed and set aside. The same please be held accordingly. 5. The order passed by the learned CIT (Appeals) is bad in law and contrary to the provisions of law and facts. It is submitted that the same be held

SHRI RUSHABHDEV SWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar&Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

234C of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment order passed under section 144 read with section 147, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The assessee raised multiple legal and factual grounds, contending that the reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid and that the addition of Rs. 75,41,227/- made by the Assessing

BHAVNA SHETALKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

reassessment order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the\nAssessing Officer under section 147 read with section 144 and section\n144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)"] for\nthe Assessment Year 2016-17.\nCondonation of Delay\n2.\nAt the outset, it is noted that the appeal has been filed with a delay\nof 170 days

SANJAY JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2014-2015 Sanjay Jayantilal Shah Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) 202/A, Shivalik 10 Vs. Vejalpur Opp: Sbi Zonal Office Ahmedabad. Ambawadi, Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aktps 8891 A (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars. : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.11.2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"], For The Assessment Year 2014–15, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2022 Passed U/S 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") By The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Assessing Officer Or Ao"].

147 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer or AO"]. 2. Facts of the Case : 2.1 Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income

NEXUS SOFTWARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 4(1),, BARODA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order following the earlier assessment dated 30/12/2010. 8. He has erred in holding that the case of the assessee is not covered by the third proviso to section 147. 9. On the facts no interest u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C

NASIMBANU MIRZA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(8)- CURRENTLY THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 376/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बनाम/ Nasimbanu Mirza Ito B/67, Mayurpark Society, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. Opp. Bibi Talab, Vatva, Daskroi, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 382440 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bfkpm6262E (Appellant / Cross Objector) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Foziya Saiyed, A.R. Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr Revenue By : 25/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2025

234C, 234D or any other section should be deleted. 4). The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal. 4.1 The assessee has also raised an additional ground as under: 5). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law on the subject the Learned Assessing Officer

SNEHA PAWAN AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

147 of\nthe Act, which was based solely on third-party information without any\nindependent application of mind OR tangible material establishing\nescapement of income on part of the assessee. The reopening is therefore\ninvalid and liable to be quashed.\n4. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings\nunder sections

SNEHA PAWAN AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

147 of\nthe Act, which was based solely on third-party information without any\nindependent application of mind OR tangible material establishing\nescapement of income on part of the assessee. The reopening is therefore\ninvalid and liable to be quashed.\n4. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings\nunder sections

SARFARAZKHAN SARVARKHAN PATHAN,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

u/s 69 of the Act and treated it as unexplained investment, and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the impugned addition while computing the total income. 6. That the learned CIT(Appeal)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition amount of Rs.36,96,643/- which is purely based

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

234C and 234D of the Act. Subsequently, the A.O had passed an order u/s 154 of the Act on 19.06.2024, levying interest of Rs.92,153/- u/s 234A of the Act, for the reason that Nil interest was levied while completing the assessment u/s 153C of the Act. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the A.O. charging interest u/s 234A

DINESHBHAI PUNJABHAI PATEL,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

reassessment proceedings, the\nAssessing Officer noted that the assessee had shown purchases\namounting to Rs.14,24,58,326/- made in cash allegedly for\nprocuring agricultural commodities such as Raydo and other\nproduce. The assessee failed to submit complete books of\naccount, purchase bills, or supporting ledgers. Only bills\naggregating to Rs.26,04,914/- were furnished, with the balance\npurchases remaining

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. USHABEN P. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain

SMT. USHABEN P. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. SONAL D. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain

SMT. KANTABEN S. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain

SMT. RAKSHABEN S. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), ( ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain

SMT. SONAL D. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

234C of the act is not justified. 5. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) is unjustified ITA N. 1858/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Revenue’s appeal ) 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing to treat the profit from sales of shares of Rs.7,24,24,241/- as long term capital gain