GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

reassessment. It is also established principle of law that if a particular authority has been designated to record his/her satisfaction on any particular issue, then it is that authority alone who should apply his/her independent mind to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be ‘independent’ and not ‘borrowed’ or ‘dictated’ satisfaction

SHRI SHAILESH S. PATEL,,PALANPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5,, PALANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3063/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

THE ITO, WARD-1,, ANAND vs. M/S. DEVRAJ DEVELOPERS,, ANAND

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

239 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that ITA Nos. 1524 to 1526/Ahd/18 (ITO vs. M/s. Devraj Developers) A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 - 8 - where Assessing Officer completed assessment under section 143(3) making certain addition in respect of unexplained investment, he addition merely could not reopen said assessment for enhancement of said on basis of report

THE ITO, WARD-1,, ANAND vs. M/S. DEVRAJ DEVELOPERS,, ANAND

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

239 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that ITA Nos. 1524 to 1526/Ahd/18 (ITO vs. M/s. Devraj Developers) A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 - 8 - where Assessing Officer completed assessment under section 143(3) making certain addition in respect of unexplained investment, he addition merely could not reopen said assessment for enhancement of said on basis of report

THE ITO, WARD-1,, ANAND vs. M/S. DEVRAJ DEVELOPERS,, ANAND

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

239 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that ITA Nos. 1524 to 1526/Ahd/18 (ITO vs. M/s. Devraj Developers) A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 - 8 - where Assessing Officer completed assessment under section 143(3) making certain addition in respect of unexplained investment, he addition merely could not reopen said assessment for enhancement of said on basis of report

LALITABEN DIPAKBHAI MODH,SURAT vs. PCIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

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

Section 147 of the Act. Therefore a notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03- 2021 was issued to the assessee. 3. In response, the assessee filed her Return of Income on 28-04- 2021 declaring total income of Rs.99,520/-. The Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s. 271F for not filing the return will within the time limit prescribed u/s

SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA S.PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(OSD)-I,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal, is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

239/-, U/s. 80IA Rs.94,61,615/- and u/s. 80L for Rs.9,000/-. The AO finalized the assessment for A.Y. 2002-03 vide order u/s. 143(3) dated 30/3/2005 determining total income at Rs.1,36,94,580/-. The said assessment was a subject matter of appeal before the CIT(A) and the ITAT. As per the order dated 31/12/2007 giving effect

SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA S.PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD)-I,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal, is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

239/-, U/s. 80IA Rs.94,61,615/- and u/s. 80L for Rs.9,000/-. The AO finalized the assessment for A.Y. 2002-03 vide order u/s. 143(3) dated 30/3/2005 determining total income at Rs.1,36,94,580/-. The said assessment was a subject matter of appeal before the CIT(A) and the ITAT. As per the order dated 31/12/2007 giving effect

RAJIV AMRITLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

147 1,68,044/- 2.4. In the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and only based on the statements recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act, the above additions were made in the hands of the assessee without taking note of the Retraction Affidavit filed by the assessee and his wife on 30/03/2021 before

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NANDAN EXIM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble&Smt. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं.Ita No. 1811/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Dcit Vs. M/S. Nandan Exim Ltd. Cir-3(1)(1), Chiripal House, Ahmedabad Satellite Road, Ahmedabad- 380015 Pan:Aaa Cn5 327 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 20.03.2015 passed by the DCIT, Cir-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad for Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Revenue has challenged the correctness of the order in deleting addition of Rs. 96,92,369/- made on account of TUF scheme (Technology Upgradation

SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

M/S. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEPTIONS, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,BARODA vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-5,, BARODA

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-5., BARODA

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT..DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-5., BARODA

In the result, ITA No. 2841/Ahd/17, i

section 11. He submits that the proviso to Section 2(15) will not come into play ITA Nos: 1257/Ahd/13, 3303/Ahd/16, 3304/Ahd/16, 408/Ahd/17 (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13) ITA Nos: 336 and 337/Ahd/2015 and 2957/Ahd/2014, (Assessment years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2010-11) ITA Nos: 2839, 2840 and 2841/ Ahd/ 2017 (Assessment years