SHREE SAMARTH ELECTRICALS PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

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

condone the delay of 120 days in ITA No.612/RJT/2024,as also 119 days’ delay, each in filing, the appeals in ITA No.609 and 610/RJT/2024, and admit these respective appeals for hearing. 7. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as the facts narrated in ITA No.612/RJT/2024, for assessment Year 2018-19, have been taken into consideration for deciding

SHREE SAMARTH SWITCHGEAR AND TRANSMISSION PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

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

condone the delay of 120 days in ITA No.612/RJT/2024,as also 119 days’ delay, each in filing, the appeals in ITA No.609 and 610/RJT/2024, and admit these respective appeals for hearing. 7. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as the facts narrated in ITA No.612/RJT/2024, for assessment Year 2018-19, have been taken into consideration for deciding

KRUPA VILAS GAU SEVA TRUST,KUTCH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 162/Rjt/2023 (Assessment Year: Na) (Hybrid Hearing)

condoned the delay and remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT (E ) for fresh adjudication. The findings of the Co-ordinate Bench are reproduced below. “13. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. We note that

GOJIYA BHIKHUBHAI,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

119 days and\n120 days, respectively, before this Tribunal. The assessees have moved petition\nfor condonation of delay in each appeal, separately on separate affidavit,\nrequesting the Bench to condone the respective delays, noted above. Since\nthese appeals are related to the same group, therefore, the assessee submitted the\nidentical and similar petitions for condonation of delay, that is, contents

LATE ARJAN KANJI PUJARA SMARK CHARITABLE TRUST BHACHAU,BHACHAU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

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

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

section 139 of the Act is condoned (ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form No. 10B for years prior to AY. 2018-19, The commissioner of Income-tax are authorized to admit and dispose of by 31-3-2020 such applications for condonation of delay u's 119

SAURASTRA VIPASSANA RESEARCH CENTRE,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

delay in filing of Form 10B has now been condoned by the appropriate authority, suitable directions may be given to Assessing Officer to allow the benefit of exemption under Section 11 & 12 of the Act. 6. On going through the facts of the case and the order under Section 119

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)

condonation thereof by the appropriate authority in exercise of powers granted u/s 119(2) of the Act, claim of exemption under section 11 and 12, would automatically stand negated u/s 143(1) of the Act. 4.10. It may be pertinent to quote the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shivanand Electronics

SAVITABEN NATHALAL VADI,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay is condoned in filing the appeal.\n6. Brief facts qua issue are that the, in this case, the assessee did not file her return\nof income for the A. Y. 2017-18 as per provisions of section 139 of the I.T. Act,\n1961. As per credible written information available with AO, the assessee\ndeposited cash

SHRI SAJADIALI SARDAR PATEL SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-2(1)(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.607/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sajadiali Sardar Patel Seva Ito Ward-2, (1) (2) Vs. Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Rajkot – 360001 At Sajadiyali – Rajkot New Aayakar Bhavan, At Sajadiyali Taluka, Race Course Ring Road, Jamkandorana, Dist, Rajkot – 360001 Sajadiyali – Rajkot 360001 Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas2374L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28 / 01 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22 / 04/2025

Section 119(2)(b) empowers the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and its delegated authorities to consider applications for condonation of delay

SHRI CHINTAN KANJIBHAI KATARIYA,ANJAR-KUTCH vs. THE ITO WARD-1, , GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Further, the Assessing Officer also observed that the assessee had made substantial cash payments to labourers towards site expenses. However, on verification of bills, vouchers etc. the Assessing Officer observed that certain payments were made in cash below Rs. 20,000/- and some of the payments were supported only by self-made vouchers

SHREEJI CERAMIC INDUSTRIES,MORBI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.266/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Shreeji Ceramic Industries, The Principal Commissioner Of Vs. 8/A National Highway, Lalpar Income Tax – 1, Morbi - 363642 Rajkot "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs8846B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit (Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajkot – 1 [In Short, “The Ld. Pcit”], Dated 30.03.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows.

delay is hereby condoned. 8. Now we proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merit. 9. That the Assessee is in appeal before us. Ld. AR of the Assessee has drown our attention to the first para of Ld. PCIT’s order in which Ld. PCIT has mentioned that the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and the assessment

SHREE LILIYA LATHI TALUKA SAHAKARI KHARID VECHAN SANGH LTD.,AT. LILIYA MOTA, TALUKA LATHI, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 (1) (4), AMRELI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, is dismissed, as withdrawn

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.831/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2019-20) Liliya Lathi Taluka Sahkari Income Tax Officer Ward- बनाम Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. 3(1)(4), Rajkot. At Liliya Mota, Vs. Amreli-365535. Pan/Gir No. Abkas8870J "थायीलेखासं /. जीआइआरसं /. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. Dr

condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, which has been allowed by the ld. CCIT -Rajkot

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)

section 119(2) (b) of the Income tax Act, to file the petition for condonation of delay before the learned

M/S. KALPATARU CREDIT CO-OPRATIVE SOCIETY,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the matter is set aside to the file of the assessing officer with the above directions

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.

119 days in filing the present appeal before us. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee is hereby being condoned. 4. On merits, the brief facts of the case are that the AO reopened the case of the assessee under section

M/S. KUTCH MANDVI BHATIYA MAHAJAN,MANDV-KUTCH vs. THE ITO-WARD-1, RAJKOT

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

section 119(2)(b) of the Act, the CBDT has decided that where the application for condonation of delay in filing

SHREE CHALALA VI KA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ,AMRELI vs. THE ITO WARD 3(1)(4), RAJKOT-AMRELI., RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A Ccountant Member & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 358/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) Shree Chalala Vi Ka Seva Sahakari Vs. The Ito Ward 3(1)(4), Mandali Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Chalala Haveli Road, Road, Dhari Amreli - 365630 Rajkot - 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatas2273D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm; Captioned Appeal Filed By Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20, 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 31/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(1) Of The Act. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: - 1. The Learned Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Kolkata Erred In Confirming Action Of Cpc, Bangalore In Disallowing Claim Of Deduction Of Rs. 3,51,828/- U/S Sop Of The Act By Failing To Appreciate That Provisions Of Sec. 143(1)(A)(V) Do Not Provide For Denial Of Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act When The Return Of Income Is Not Filed Within Time Allowed U/S 139(1) Of The Act But U/S 139(4). 2. The Learned Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Kolkata Erred In Upholding Action Of The Cpc, Bangalore In Making Adjustment To The Returned Income Of The Appellant By Way Of Shree Chalala Vikas Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd.

119(2)(b) of the Act passed by the CCIT, Rajkot in case of Appellant. 4.The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw any ground of appeal anytime up to the hearing of this appeal. 3. Facts of the Case that the appellant is a co-operative society with objects and activities of providing credit facilities

SHRI PANCHTALAVADA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LIMITED,AMRELI vs. THE ITO WARD-3(1)(4), RAJKOT-AMRELI., AMRELI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.118/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Panchtalavada Seva Sahkari Income Tax Officer, Ward – बनाम Mandali Ltd. 3(1)(4), Rajkot-Amreli, Panchtalavada, Amreli–3650220, Ganga Bhauvan, Keriya /Vs. Gujarat Road, Amreli–365 560 "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं . / Pan/Gir No.: Aaxas 4713 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Ms. Devina Patel, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20, Is Directed Against The Order Passed, Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Hyderabad Dated 06.01.2025, Which In Turn Arises, Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc)/Assessing Officer, U/S 143(1) Of The Act Dated 08.02.2021. 2. At The Outset, Learned Counsel Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Has Stated That The Assessee Wants To Withdraw The Present Appeal Because Condonation Of Delay For Filing Income Tax Return U/S 119(2)(B) Of The Act Has Been Condoned Sh. Pssm Ltd.

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad dated 06.01.2025, which in turn arises, out of an assessment order passed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC)/Assessing Officer, u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 08.02.2021. 2. At the outset, Learned Counsel

SHRI DHIRENDRA NARBHERAM SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 2 (3) (5), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

delay. Accordingly, we condone the same in pursuance to the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re reported in 125 taxmann.com 151 and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. 4. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the order