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)

u/s 147 was justified and in accordance with law, considering the reasons recorded and the facts of the case. 1.6 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in observing that the investment as per the books of account exceeded the investment determined by the DVO towards cost of construction

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)

u/s 147 was justified and in accordance with law, considering the reasons recorded and the facts of the case. 1.6 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in observing that the investment as per the books of account exceeded the investment determined by the DVO towards cost of construction

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)

u/s 147 was justified and in accordance with law, considering the reasons recorded and the facts of the case. 1.6 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in observing that the investment as per the books of account exceeded the investment determined by the DVO towards cost of construction

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

u/s 143(2) during the re-assessment proceeding which is pre- requisite to frame an assessment order. Accordingly assessee prayed that the impugned assessment order should be cancelled. The assessee in this regard placed his reliance on Hon’ble SC judgment in case of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon 229 CTR 219 and various other judgments. 8. However

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

u/s 143(2) during the re-assessment proceeding which is pre- requisite to frame an assessment order. Accordingly assessee prayed that the impugned assessment order should be cancelled. The assessee in this regard placed his reliance on Hon’ble SC judgment in case of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon 229 CTR 219 and various other judgments. 8. However

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KUNJ INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1809-1810/Ahd/2017 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2854/Ahd/2016 With C.O. 13/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 D.C.I.T, M/S.Kunj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Zodiac Plaza, Cirle-2(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad. St. Xaviers Corner, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aadck1900D

u/s 143(2) during the re-assessment proceeding which is pre- requisite to frame an assessment order. Accordingly assessee prayed that the impugned assessment order should be cancelled. The assessee in this regard placed his reliance on Hon’ble SC judgment in case of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon 229 CTR 219 and various other judgments. 8. However

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

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roynandam Exim Limited, Vs. Dcit, Survey No.198, 203/2, Saijpur – Circle – 3(1)(1), Gopalpur, Pirana Road, Piplaj Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad – 382 405. [Pan No. Aaacn 5327 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) ..

section 147 after the expiry of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of income u/s 139 having not been disclosed fully and truly all materials facts necessary

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

reassessment has to be based on fulfilment of certain pre-condition and if the concept of "change of opinion" is removed, as contended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of re-opening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of "change of opinion" as an in-built test to check abuse of power

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

reassessment has to be based on fulfilment of certain pre-condition and if the concept of "change of opinion" is removed, as contended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of re-opening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of "change of opinion" as an in-built test to check abuse of power

THE ITO, WARD-2(2)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DUSHYANT U PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

269 Sachin M. Prajapati 386925 1488578 Kalpesh B. Prajapati 386925 1488578 Total 1160775 4465734 4465734 B. NO. Motibhai R. Prajapati 144150 554574 260 Bhagwanbhai R. Prajapati 144150 554574 ITA No. 1197/Ahd/2019 a/w. CO No. 212/Ahd/2019 [Dushyant U Patel] A.Y. 2011-12 - 4 - Kantibhai R. Prajapati 144150 554574 432450 1663722 Total 1663722 B.NO. 261 Motibhai R. Prajapaii 113850 438004 Bhagwanbhai

GAUTAMBHAI NANSINH CHAUHAN,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

147 read with section 144B of the Act. 2. Facts of the Case 2.1 The assessee is an individual and a resident of village Khododhi, Khambhat Taluka, District Anand, Gujarat. For the relevant assessment 2 year 2019–20, the assessee did not file return of income under section 139(1). Based on information received through the Insight Portal indicating substantial