BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

50 results for “capital gains”+ Section 92clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,886Delhi1,413Bangalore564Chennai470Ahmedabad423Kolkata331Jaipur326Chandigarh210Hyderabad204Pune162Karnataka137Cochin118Indore101Surat99Visakhapatnam54Raipur52Calcutta52Rajkot50Nagpur43Amritsar41Lucknow40Guwahati36Cuttack32SC19Dehradun16Telangana16Jodhpur8Jabalpur7Ranchi7Agra5Panaji5Rajasthan5Allahabad5Patna2Kerala2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Gauhati1Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 14756Section 14854Section 143(3)45Addition to Income38Section 218Section 26315Section 25011Deduction11Section 6810Section 80I

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SHRI NARENDRA J.BHIMANI,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeal is dismissed

ITA 411/RJT/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2018AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2008-09. The assessee has also filed a cross objection but as learned counsel for the assessee fairly submits, it merely supports this order of the CIT(A) and is not, therefore, pressed. The CO is thus dismissed as not pressed. 2. Coming to the appeal filed

RADHIKA JEWELLERS,RAJKOT vs. DY.CIT 2 (1), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Samir Jani, Ld. AR

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

10
Exemption9
Long Term Capital Gains8
For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 45Section 45(3)

92,482/- in both the cases and as such no capital gain arises. Page 5 of 11 Radhika Jewellers 8. However, the assessing officer rejected the above reply of the assessee and held that the provisions of section

BHIKHALAL PRAHALADRAI AGARWAL HUF,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM

ITA 780/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.779&780/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Bhikhalal Prahaladrai Agarwal- Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Huf, Gandhidham Circle C/O. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1St It Office, Plot No. 32, Sector No. 3, Near Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Iffco Colony, Gandhidham Opp. Rajkumar College Rajkot Gandhidham - 370201 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabha4638R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

capital gain ( LTCG). Thus, the assessee had neither booked any LTCG in the scrip of Vax Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, nor claimed any exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act in respect of Vax Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, as alleged by the assessing officer in the reasons recorded. Hence, the reasons recorded by the AO were factually incorrect, and does

BHIKHALAL PRAHLADRAI AGARWAL HUF,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM

ITA 779/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.779&780/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Bhikhalal Prahaladrai Agarwal- Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Huf, Gandhidham Circle C/O. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1St It Office, Plot No. 32, Sector No. 3, Near Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Iffco Colony, Gandhidham Opp. Rajkumar College Rajkot Gandhidham - 370201 Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabha4638R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

capital gain ( LTCG). Thus, the assessee had neither booked any LTCG in the scrip of Vax Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, nor claimed any exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act in respect of Vax Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, as alleged by the assessing officer in the reasons recorded. Hence, the reasons recorded by the AO were factually incorrect, and does

SHRI JAY ATULBHAI MODY ,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (2) (3),, RAJKOT

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 240/RJT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed, आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 240/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2007-2008 Shri Jay Atulbhai Mody, I.T.O., “Pankaj”, Jalaram-3, Vs. Ward-2(2)(3), Street No.2, Rajkot. Near Indira Circle, University Road, Rajkot.

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50C

capital gain. 11. On the other hand, the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 12. We have heard the rival contention of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The facts of the case have been elaborated in the previous paragraph, hence we are not inclined to repeat the same for the sake

SHRI DHIRAJLAL BHANJIBHAI VADALIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 135/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dhirajlal Bhanjibhai Vadalia Cit-1, 1St Floor, Sterling Appts., Vs Rajkot. Jawahar Road, Rajkot.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54BSection 54F

92,440/-. On perusal of the assessment record, the ld.CIT noticed that the assessee had sold a capital asset viz. a land bearing Survey no.56/1/8, paiki/6 of Village Haripar Pal, and earned long term capital gain of Rs.2,94,27,541/-. The assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,35,30,171/- under section

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2) (5), , RAJKOT vs. SHRI DHIRAJLAL BHANJIBHAI VADALIA, RAJKOT

ITA 228/RJT/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dhirajlal Bhanjibhai Vadalia Cit-1, 1St Floor, Sterling Appts., Vs Rajkot. Jawahar Road, Rajkot.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54BSection 54F

92,440/-. On perusal of the assessment record, the ld.CIT noticed that the assessee had sold a capital asset viz. a land bearing Survey no.56/1/8, paiki/6 of Village Haripar Pal, and earned long term capital gain of Rs.2,94,27,541/-. The assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,35,30,171/- under section

URVASHI GIRISHBHAI LAL,RAJKOT vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 466/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Section 147 of the Act, that is, reassessment was dropped by the assessing officer. In this regard, the detailed submission made by the assessee and the arguments made before the Ld. CIT(A), are reproduced below: “Simply relying upon the general modus operandi does not mean that all the transactions undertaken throughout the country by millions of subscribers are bogus

BABUBHAI KANJIBHAI SAKARIA,JETPUR vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

ITA 156/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 156/Rjt/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Babubhai Kanjibhai Sakariya Vs. Ito, Wd 1(2)(1), Rajkot Plot No. 82 Satyam Park, Amarnagar Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Jetpur,(Rajkot-Gujarat) -360370 Road, Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agnps7407C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 250Section 28

92,52,808/-. Therefore, the assessing officer issued a show cause notice to the assessee stating that why not amount of interest on enhanced compensation paid for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land, at Rs. 1,89,62,258 /- should not be treated as receipts in assessee`s hands and it should be taxable under the head income from other sources

HIMESH R. SHAH,JAMNAGAR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,, JAMNAGAR.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 298/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 Himesh R. Shah Vs. Acit, Cir.3 Parikh & Co. Jamnagar. Ranjit Road Jamnagar 361 001. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.S. Varia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri D.S. Varia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.CIT(DR)
Section 14ASection 250(6)

92,733/- after current year loss at Rs. 24,34f348/-. Whereas investments in shares/PPF/ Insurance policies etc. Are as on 1st day of accounting year as on 01/04/2013 is at Rs. 97/23/493/-. Thus there is a decrease in such investment during the year by 10,96,700/-. Ail such investments are very old and the same is out of capital

DENISH KHODIDAS PATEL,RAJKOT vs. PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.356/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Denish Khodidas Patel Vs. The Pr.Cit-1 Raag Mahavir Society, Street Rajkot No.2, Nirmala Convent School Road, Rajkot – 360005, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agipp1382Q (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar Respondent By Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am:

Section 147Section 263Section 50C

92,06,122) between valuation adopted for stamp duty purpose by the stamp duty valuation authorities and sale consideration declared in the sale deed. In 128- ITA.356/RJT/2024 – A.Y. 2016-17 Shri Denish Khodidas Patel vs. PCIT the return of income for the year under consideration, the assessee has declared short term capital gain by taking sale consideration of above referred

KUMAR RAMESH SAHU,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT

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

ITA 336/RJT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.336/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Kumar Ramesh Sahu बनाम/ The Acit, Sundaram, 72/3, New Cirtcle-2(3) Vs. College Wadi Rajkot – 60 001 150Ft5. Ring Road Opp. Meera Apartment Rajkot – 360 005 (Gujarat) "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aesps 5531 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 13/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha:

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 54Section 68

capital gain and other sources of income. The return was filed on 18.11.2009 declaring net income of Rs. 5, 40,010/-. The case was passed under Section 143(1) of the Act upon noticed that there is an unsecured loan of Rs. 65,73,083/- to KRN Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and a cash was deposited before issuing a cheque

RASILABEN BHARAT PARMAR,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 923/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.923/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rasilaben Bharat Parmar The Ito, Ward-2(1) बनाम Block No.1252, Narayannagar Jamnagar. Opp: Gulabnagar Vs. Jamnagar. Pan : Ckvpp 5590 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Sainicaptioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Vide Order Dated 08.11.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Vide Order Dated 01.03.2022. 2. The Ground Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal, Pertains To Addition Of Rs. 7,60,800/-, Made By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A), On Account Of Long-Term Capital Gain.

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50C

capital gain (without indexation). 4.Aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer, the assessee, carried the matter in appeal, before the ld.CIT(A), who has just narrated the facts of the assessing officer and confirmed the action of the assessing officer. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted detailed reply before the ld.CIT(A), along-with documentary evidences. The important

SMT. MEENABEN KETANKUMAR MAKIM,JAMNAGAR vs. THE PR, CIT, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 81/RJT/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot19 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

capital gain of Rs.18,81,843/- on sale of 'Lifeline Drugs & Pharma Ltd and "TVS Motors” equity shares and which was claimed excempt u/s.10(38) of the Act in the return of income. It is found that the AO has not is found that the AO has not issued any specific queries on the issue on which the case

FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALLIED INDS.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE GANDHIDHAM,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 99/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puglia, Ld. (CIT) DR
Section 143(3)

capital receipt. The fact that the assessee chooses to exploit it’s in a different manner, other than actual import, will not make any change is the character of the receipt. 14. The sale of import entitlement is one of the modes of exploiting the import entitlement and, therefore, will clearly be a revenue receipt :  [George Malijo & Co. (Vizag

FRIENDS SALT WORKS AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES,GANDHIDHAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 169/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Puglia, Ld. (CIT) DR
Section 143(3)

capital receipt. The fact that the assessee chooses to exploit it’s in a different manner, other than actual import, will not make any change is the character of the receipt. 14. The sale of import entitlement is one of the modes of exploiting the import entitlement and, therefore, will clearly be a revenue receipt :  [George Malijo & Co. (Vizag

PARI ANIL GANDHI,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 897/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 896 & 897/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Pari Anil Gandhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), C-702 Sadguru Vatika, Airport Road, 2- Aayakar Bhavan Race Course Ring Maruti Nagar, Rajkot - 360001 Road, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bahpg7804E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09 / 10 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05 / 01 /2026 आदेश/Order Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm; Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14, Is Directed Against Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dated 22/11/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T. Act, On Dated 28/03/2022. 2. Since, The Issues Involved All These Appeals Are Common & Identical; Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Are Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take The Lead Case In Ita No.896/Rjt/2024 For Assessment Year 2013-14. Ita No. 896&897/Rjt/2024 Pari Anil Gandhi Rajkot

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 154Section 234Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

92,595/- i.e. Total share transaction of Rs.49,74,295/-is treated as bogus and added to the total income as per the proviso of section 68 of the it Act it is totally wrong. Unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 4. The learned commissioner of income tax (appeals), national faceless appeal centre has erred in confirming the action

PARI ANIL GANDHI,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(1) RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 896/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 896 & 897/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Pari Anil Gandhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), C-702 Sadguru Vatika, Airport Road, 2- Aayakar Bhavan Race Course Ring Maruti Nagar, Rajkot - 360001 Road, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bahpg7804E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09 / 10 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05 / 01 /2026 आदेश/Order Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm; Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14, Is Directed Against Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dated 22/11/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T. Act, On Dated 28/03/2022. 2. Since, The Issues Involved All These Appeals Are Common & Identical; Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Are Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take The Lead Case In Ita No.896/Rjt/2024 For Assessment Year 2013-14. Ita No. 896&897/Rjt/2024 Pari Anil Gandhi Rajkot

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 154Section 234Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

92,595/- i.e. Total share transaction of Rs.49,74,295/-is treated as bogus and added to the total income as per the proviso of section 68 of the it Act it is totally wrong. Unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 4. The learned commissioner of income tax (appeals), national faceless appeal centre has erred in confirming the action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SARVANAND SADHURAM SONVANI, RAJKOT

ITA 795/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.809 To 819/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2012-13 To 2022-23) Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani, बनाम The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle-1, Vs. C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Rajkot-360001( Gujarat) Road,Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइ आरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita (Ss) No.23&24/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2021-22 & 2022-23) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani Tax,Central Circle-1, C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, Vs. “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Road, Rajkot-360001(Gujarat) Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.791 To 796/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2012-13 To 2013-14 & 2017-18 To 2020-21) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani, Tax,Central Circle-1, C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, Vs. “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Road, Rajkot-360001( Gujarat) Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranapura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungulia, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

section 143(3) of the Act. 2. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in ITA No.793/RJT/2024, for assessment Year 2017-18, have been taken into consideration for deciding the above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SARVANAND SADHURAM SONVANI, RAJKOT

ITA 791/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.809 To 819/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2012-13 To 2022-23) Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani, बनाम The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,Central Circle-1, Vs. C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Rajkot-360001( Gujarat) Road,Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइ आरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita (Ss) No.23&24/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2021-22 & 2022-23) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani Tax,Central Circle-1, C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, Vs. “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Road, Rajkot-360001(Gujarat) Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.791 To 796/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2012-13 To 2013-14 & 2017-18 To 2020-21) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम Sarvanand Sadhuram Sonwani, Tax,Central Circle-1, C/O. Jagdish Trading Co. Danapith, Vs. “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Road, Rajkot-360001( Gujarat) Rajkot 360001 "ायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan No.: Afbps0008N (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranapura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungulia, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

section 143(3) of the Act. 2. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical, therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in ITA No.793/RJT/2024, for assessment Year 2017-18, have been taken into consideration for deciding the above