JITESHBHAI RAMNIKLAL NAGADA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.39/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Kantaben Ramniklal Nagda Vs. Ito, Wd- 2(6), Jamnagar Flat No. 603, K D Tower, Oswal Aayakar Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Colony, Jamnagar Rajkot Highway, Jamnagar-361004 Jamnagar - 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agtpn7366D (Assessee) (Respondent)

Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 16,80,923/- by Ld. AO by denying the cost of improvement for want of necessary supporting documents. 4. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law by confirming addition u/s 50C for substituting Jantri value of assets which is higher than actual sale price without considering the fact that the land

KANTABEN RAMNIKLAL NAGDA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessees, are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.39/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Kantaben Ramniklal Nagda Vs. Ito, Wd- 2(6), Jamnagar Flat No. 603, K D Tower, Oswal Aayakar Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Colony, Jamnagar Rajkot Highway, Jamnagar-361004 Jamnagar - 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agtpn7366D (Assessee) (Respondent)

Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 16,80,923/- by Ld. AO by denying the cost of improvement for want of necessary supporting documents. 4. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law by confirming addition u/s 50C for substituting Jantri value of assets which is higher than actual sale price without considering the fact that the land

SHRI VIJAY JAMNADAS VINCHHI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

delay of 58 days in filing the above appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and engaged in Bandhani Printing Works. As per AIR information, the assessee sold an immovable property for Rs. 39,00,000/- during the Financial Year 2009-10, but no Return of Income filed

DILIP KANTILAL KUBAVAT,PORBANDAR vs. ITO WD 2(3), PORBANDAR, PORBANDAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.522/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2016-17 Dilip Kantilal Kubavat Ito बनाम/ Prop. Vijay Dairy Farm, Ward 2 (3), Vs Near Ramdhun S V P Road, Porbandar 360575 Porbandar - 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Azfpk8009B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14 /10/2025 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 21.03.2025, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Here-In-After Referred To As “The Act”) Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds Of Appeal. However, The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Not To Consider The Basic Fact That The Assessee Has Gifted The Property To His Sister In Law (Younger Brother'S Wife) That Is, To A Relative For A Consideration Dilip Kantilal Kubavat

delay is condoned in filing the appeal. 6.Brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee has e-filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17, declaring total income of Rs.2,41,110/- and agriculture income of Rs.5,60,400/- on 18.03.2018. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the 1.T. Act, accepting

ALKA RAJEN SHAH,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD 1 (1) (1) , RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiassessment Year: (2019-20) Alka Rajen Shah, Income Tax Officer, 59, Silver Sand B/H. Parijat Party Plot Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot, Vs. Off: 150 Feet Ring Road, Rajkot- 360 Income Tax Officer, M.G. 005 Road, Beside Girnar Pan : Aykps 4510 K Cinema, Rajkot-360 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By. : Shri Raju Manek, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.Dr

gain/ Long term capital loss by claiming of Rs.28,06,614/-, which is bad on facts and also in law which ought to be deleted.” 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset submitted that the appeal has been filed by the assessee belatedly for 25 days. The learned Counsel adverted

SHRI TULSHIBHAI POLABHAI SAKARIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 93/Rjt/2021 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year:2015-16 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Shri Tulsibhai Polabhai Sakariya Vs. The Pr. C.I.T, 2-Bombay Housing Society, Rajkot-1, Meghdhara, University Road, Rajkot. Opp. G. K. Dholakiya, Rajkot

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee in pursuance to the judgment of Hon’ble SC in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In reported in 125 taxmann.com 151 and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. First, we take up ITA No. 93/AHD/2021 in case of Shri Tulsibhai Polabhai Sakariya 2.1 The assessee

SHRI RAMA MEPA ODEDARA,PORBANDAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4),, PORBANDAR

In the result, Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Us, The Counsel For The Assessee Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Delay & Argued That The Reason For Delay In Filing Appeal Before Itat Was That The Assessee Was Suffering From Spinal Injury & Was Advised Complete Bed Rest By The Doctors. In Support Of The Above Contention, The Assessee Also Filed Medical Certificate With Respect To The Injury Suffered

condoning the delay of 126 days in filing of the present appeal. On jurisdiction 4. On jurisdiction, the assessee has challenged the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act. However, we observe that in the instant set of facts, there was a substantial cash deposit made by the assessee in his bank account. Further, the assessee has been

THE ITO WARD-1 (2) (1),, RAJKOT vs. SHRI KHRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(2)(4),, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the assessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered in the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The Review were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in ITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Long after the conclusion of the assessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered in the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The Review were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in ITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2),, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2),, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

THE ITO WARD-1 (2) (1),, RAJKOT vs. SHRI KHRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

SHRI BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,,RAJKOT vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT vs. BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,, RAJKOT

Long after the conclusion of the\nassessment proceedings, based on new information pertaining to bank a/cs which were not covered\nin the assessment order while they had cash deposits, reopening/review were carried out. The\nReview were probably not challenged by assessee. On page 2 of assessment order (A.Y.2009-10) in\nITA No.211 of 2018, Ld.assessing officer has made a chart