SHRI BHAKTINAGAR CO OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,RAJKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

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

condoned the delay in filing appeal by 1444 days. 7. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had e-filed return of Income on 30-03-2016 showing NIL income. The case was selected for Limited Scrutiny and the assessment was completed by the AO and remaining income after claim of deduction

SHRI RAJKOT VISHASHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

condone such delay on authorities concerned. In the case of Jaya Educational Trust v I.T.A No. 256/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 10 Shri Rajkot Vishashrimali Jain Samaj vs. ITO DCIT [2021] 130 taxmann.com 225 (Chennai - Trib.), ITAT held that where assessee had filed return of income within due date specified under section 139(4) and also filed Form

SMT. SUMARIBEN R. ODEDARA,PORBANDAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), PORBANDAR

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

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

condone the delay of 02 days in filing this appeal by the assessee and the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2.1. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of trading of brass product and supplied goods to various parts of India. Further the assessee is an illiterate person

SARJAN STRUCTURE,AMRELI vs. THE DCIT/ACIT-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.413/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Sarjan Structure, Vs. The Dcit/Acit-2(1) Shyam Shikhar Complex, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Liliya Road, Course Ring Road, Amreli (Gujarat)– 365601 Rajkot (Gujarat) – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acofs8085K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Bynational Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Dated 28/02/2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Dated 29/12/2019, U/S 143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Grievances Raised By The Assessee, Which, Being Interconnected, Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: 1. The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatnam Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant Ex-Parte. Sarjan Structure Amreli

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) byNational Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 28/02/2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 29/12/2019, u/s 143(3)of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Grievances raised by the assessee, which, being interconnected, will

SHRI SHANTILAL MALTIPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,JAMNAGAR. vs. THE ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX & THE ITO-TDS-CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, ITA No.275/Rjt/2018 is allowed for statistical purposes whereas

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roy)

condoned the delay and admitted the appeal filed by the assessee to decide the issue on merit. Accordingly we direct the learned CIT (A) to admit the appeal filed by the assessee and adjudicate the same on merit afresh as per the provisions of law. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ANIMAL LOVERS CHARITABLE TRUST,JAMNAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.157/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: N.A Animal Lovers Charitable Trust Commissioner Of Income-Tax C.A Govind Sonecha, “S & A Vs. (Exemption), Ahmedabad, Room Houe”, Near Golen City, 80Ft Roa, No.609, Floor-6, Aayakar Bhawan Khodiyar Colony, B/H Saru Section (Vejalpur), Near Sachin Tower, 100 Police Headquarters, Foot Road, Anandnagar- Jamnagar-360 510 Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad-380 -015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajta 1250 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is delayed by by 136 136 days. As the order is time barred for filing Form 36 we hereby request your good-self to kindly condone the delay in filing appeal and accept Form 36 attached herewith. I also declare that the above particulars are true to the best

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND TRUST,ADIPUR vs. THE DCIT (CPC) , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

02-03-2016 intimated the assessee that the Audit Report in Form 10B is not filed alongwith the Return of Income as per Section 12A(1)(B) of the Act. The assesse was ensured to file the corrected Return, incorporating the details of such Audit, failing which the Return filed in ITR 7 will be treated as invalid. However

SHRI DHORAJI NAGRIK SHARAFI AND GRAHAK SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,DHORAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.478/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shri Dhoraji Nagrik Sharafi & Vs. Income Tax Officer Grahak Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Ward – 1(2)(1), C/O. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1St Rajkot. Floor, Dr. Radha – Krishnan Road, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot- 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaad7775Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay in filing the appeal, therefore, assessee`s appeal may be dismissed. 7. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld.CIT

BHAVESH GOVINDBHAI DADHANIYA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(4), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 762 /Rjt/ 2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Bhavesh Govindbhai Dadhaniya Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(1)(4), Rajkot 3-Jasaraj Nagar, B/H. Umiyani Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Chowk, Nr. Umiyaji Pan, 150Ft Ring Road, Ring Road, Mavdi Area, Rajkot – 360001 Rajkot – 360004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Apkpd 6290 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

section 253(5) of the Act and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra), we take a judicious view to condone the delay and admit the appeal and proceed further for hearing. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR has relied upon the orders of the lower authorities below. However, has not objected to the prayer

KOTHARI KUTUMB (DEVASHIBARA) PARIVAR TRUST - GONDAL,GONDAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION , AHMEDABAD

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

section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, are as followed: 1. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal. That on facts, AND in law, the learned 1 CIT(Exemptions) Ahmadabad has grievously erred Kothari Kutumb Parivar Trust

M/S RUDRAKSH DETERGENT & CHEMICAL PVT. LTD.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 154 of the Act, which caused delay in filing the appeal. The learned AR in support of his contention also filed the affidavit of the director of the assessee company which is placed on record. Accordingly the learned AR prayed before us for the condonation of the delay. 5. On the other hand, the learned DR considering the reasons

SHRI MANSHUKH K. KUMBHANI,AMRELI vs. THE PR.CIT-3, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

delay in filing of the present appeal is hereby being condoned. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act by making an addition of " 1,14,69,025/- under section 50C of the Act and " 20 lakhs was disallowed from the deduction claimed under section

DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT VERAVAL,VERAVAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 145/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: Na) (Hybrid Hearing) Dawoodi Bohra Jamat Veraval. Vs. Cit(Exemption), Mochi Bazar, At Mochi Bazar, Floor-6, Aayakar Bhavan Veraval-362265. (Vejalpur), Nr: Sachin Tower, 100Ft Road, Anandnagar- Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad – 380015

condoned the delay of 234 days and the appeal to be heard on merit. 6. Facts of the case are that the Zakirhusain F. Vhora manager of Dawoodi Bohra Jamat has apply for registration of the trust u/s. 12AB of the I.T. Act, 1961 was filed electronically and as per data available in ITBA, the same is filed on 24/11/2022

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,RAJKOT vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC (PRESENT JURIS. ACIT-DCIT CIR 1(1),, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, for Assessment Year 2018-19 & 2020-21. When these two appeals were called out for hearing, Learned Counsel for the assessee, invited our attention to the order dated 31.07.2024, Passed by the Division Bench of this

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,RAJKOT vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC (PRESENT JURIS. ACIT-DICT CIR 1(1) RAJKOT), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, for Assessment Year 2018-19 & 2020-21. When these two appeals were called out for hearing, Learned Counsel for the assessee, invited our attention to the order dated 31.07.2024, Passed by the Division Bench of this

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,SULTANPUR, TAL. GONDAL, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1 (1), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, for Assessment Year 2018-19 & 2020-21. When these two appeals were called out for hearing, Learned Counsel for the assessee, invited our attention to the order dated 31.07.2024, Passed by the Division Bench of this

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)

02 to 04/RJT/2019 (a/o ITA Nos.31 to 33/RJT/2019) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: (2009-10 to 2011-12) Shree Damjibhai Lekhraj Thavrani, Income-tax Officer, Ward-2, 302-Sai Darsan Apartment, Junagadh Income-tax Office, Adarshnagar-2, Joshipura, Bhutnath Chambers, Opp. Vs. Junagadh-362 001 Bahauddin College, College Road, Junagadh – 362 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./PAN/GIR

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI NILESHBHAI SURESHBHAI UNTAVADIYA, MORBI

In the result all the four appeal of Revenue and assessee are allowed for statical purpose

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 22/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing)

condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in considering the additional evidence produced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings and in deciding the assessee's appeal on the basis of the same, without recording proper reasons