NIRMAL B. CHAVDA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

income of the assessee as undisclosed receipt received by him. 4. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee and enhanced the short term capital gain

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

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

undisclosed income. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the same. (4). The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal without considering the paper book filed by the assessee and without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing as mandated by under rule

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

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

undisclosed income. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the same. (4). The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal without considering the paper book filed by the assessee and without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing as mandated by under rule

HANSA JITENDRA HARIA,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.104/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Hansa Jitendra Haria Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 2, Oswal Colony, Near Rajendra Income Tax Balkrindagan, Jamnagar, Gujarat Jamnagar 361005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahph4309L (Assessee) (Respondent)

undisclosed income in the garb of long term capital gain. The order is squarely applicable in the case of the assessee

MANSUKHBHAI KANJIBHAI SAKARIYA,RAJKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.318/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Sakariya The Pr.Commissioner Of बनाम At Khajuri Gundala Income Tax-1, Rajkot. Post Station: Vavdi Vs. Amarnagar, Khajuri Gundala. Pan : Aslps 7027 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr

undisclosed interest received on enhanced compensation paid for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land of Rs.1,89,62,258/-, you are requested to furnish the following details/documents: Brief note on the nature of business carried on by the assessee during the previous year. The brief note on the nature of business carried on by me during the previous year

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

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

Capital Gains and also Income from Other Sources. For the asst year 2006-07 the assessee filed his Return of Income on 31-07-2006 admitting total income of Rs.4,17,050/=. The return was processed under section 143[1] dated 06-12-2006 and refund was issued to the assessee. Thus there was no regular assessment u/s.143

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

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

Capital Gains and also Income from Other Sources. For the asst year 2006-07 the assessee filed his Return of Income on 31-07-2006 admitting total income of Rs.4,17,050/=. The return was processed under section 143[1] dated 06-12-2006 and refund was issued to the assessee. Thus there was no regular assessment u/s.143

KAUSHALIYA SAMPATLAL DUDANI,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.659/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2012-2013 Kaushaliya Sampatlal Dudani The Ito, Ward-2(6), बनाम/ K-1/79/4 G.I.D.C., Shanker Ayakar Bhawan, Jamnagar Vs Tekri, Udyognagar, Jamnagar Jamnagar. Gujarart-361005 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abnpd8662P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Ld. Sr-Dr

capital gain arose in the assessee’s case from the sale of the security u/s Kaushaliya Sampatlal Dudani 10(38) of the Act of Tuni Textile Limited amounting to Rs. 25,17,000/- u/s 68 of the Act, which is not penny stock. The said addition made is bad in law as all the basic conditions required to avail

THE ITO, WARD-5,, MUNDRA (KUTCH) vs. SHRI KOTAK MAYUR ARVINDBHAI, MUNDRA (KUTCH)

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

undisclosed income. 2) The Id CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts that not considering impounded cash books entries as evidence for cash received by assessee. 3) On the facts and circumstances of the case Ld CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the AO. 4) It is therefore, prayed that the order

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

undisclosed investments based on wrong assumption of facts. According to the learned AR there was the sale proceeds of Rs. 4,85,95,023.00 out of which a sum of 9 1,03,50,000.00 was disclosed but no inference can be drawn that the cash available with the assessee was only of Rs. 1,03,50,000.00 only

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

undisclosed investments based on wrong assumption of facts. According to the learned AR there was the sale proceeds of Rs. 4,85,95,023.00 out of which a sum of 9 1,03,50,000.00 was disclosed but no inference can be drawn that the cash available with the assessee was only of Rs. 1,03,50,000.00 only

SHRI MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN ,GANDHIDHAM vs. THEACIT, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

undisclosed investments based on wrong assumption of facts. According to the learned AR there was the sale proceeds of Rs. 4,85,95,023.00 out of which a sum of 9 1,03,50,000.00 was disclosed but no inference can be drawn that the cash available with the assessee was only of Rs. 1,03,50,000.00 only

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

undisclosed investments based on wrong assumption of facts. According to the learned AR there was the sale proceeds of Rs. 4,85,95,023.00 out of which a sum of 9 1,03,50,000.00 was disclosed but no inference can be drawn that the cash available with the assessee was only of Rs. 1,03,50,000.00 only

NISHANT PAREKH - LEGAL HEIR OF MINA PAREKH,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JAMNAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 196/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Nishant Parekh – Legak Heir Of Mina Income Tax Officer, Wd – 1(3), Parekh Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 322, Madhav Square, Opp. Avantika Jamnagar – 361001 Complex, Limda Lane Road, Jamnagar – 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aanpp9471F (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

capital gain and has been earned by the assessee on account of trading in respect of the said shares. Merely because trading in the shares of the said company was suspended on the 7 Nishant Parekh Stock Exchange, in absence of any material brought on record to suggest that purchase and sales of said shares was bogus, the Assessing Officer

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SYMBOSA GRANITO PRIVATE LIMITED, WANKANER

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is a dismissed

capital gains. The company has set off brought forwarded\nlosses against income of Rs.1,16,17,215/-. The assessee-company is engaged in\nthe manufacturing of Ceramic Vitrified Tiles. In this case, a search action was\ncarried out on 16/12/2020 at the business premise of the assessee -company by\nGST Department. During the search proceedings, the assessee admitted that

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

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:

Capital Gain Rs. 12,79,751 and denial of exemption u/s.54 of the Act on alleged finding that bill of purchase of Gold Bar dtd. 25/12/1985 is bogus and to treat sale proceed of Gold Bar as income from undisclosed

NITINBHAI PANCHABHAI DHAKECHA,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1)(5), RAJKOT

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

undisclosed Long Term\nCapital Gain without giving any deduction of cost of acquisition.\n5) Being aggrieved of the assessment order the appellant filed an appeal\nbefore Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), which ahs been\ndismissed by Ld. CIT(A).\n9. That the assessee filed an appeal before us against the order of Ld. CIT(A)\ndated 12.06.2023.\n10. During

SMT. HIRABEN PRAGJIBHAI TALA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

gain on the alleged ground that no proof of the same was furnished. The AO be directed to allow the claim of the appellant. I.T.A No. 326/Rjt/2014 A.Y. 2006-07 Page No 2 Smt. Hiraben Pragjibhai Tala vs. ITO 3. The learned CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in retaining the addition of Rs.8

MADHUBHAI G. LUNAGARIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.30/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Income Tax Officer, Madhubhai G. Lunagaria, Ward-2(3), Vs. 4, Ranchhodnagar Society, Rajkot. Street No.4, Opp. Akshar Maidan, Rajkot.

gain or profit on sale of said land, the undisclosed income comes to Rs.64,75,000/- The Assessment Proceedings in your case have been going on since long. However, despites several reminders you have kept of raising various objections. In view of Hon’ble Court decision in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India