ARHAM ENTERPRISE,DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE ITO(TDS), WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

2. In an appeal filed, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has vide order dated 05.07.2024 dismissed the appeal vide order dated 05.07.2024 dismissed the appeal without proper appropriation of facts on record and submission filed. without proper appropriation of facts on record and submission filed

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

2. In an appeal filed, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has vide order dated 05.07.2024 dismissed the appeal vide order dated 05.07.2024 dismissed the appeal without proper appropriation of facts on record and submission filed. without proper appropriation of facts on record and submission filed

SHABBIR SAIFUDDIN MAKATI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1),, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.419/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shabbir Safuddini Makati बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(6), Jamnagar, Aaykar /Vs. C-2/333, Gidc, Shankar Bhwan, Jamnagar-361 004 Tekari, Udyog Nagar, Jamnagar-361004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdpm8899E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law by passed order against assessee u/s 250 for failure to comply with the show cause notice even without considering the assessee point of view. 3. Assessee has fully cooperated with the assessing Officer for the completion of assessment and provided the complete details in short time, without any delay or default

CHINTAN DWARKADAS CHOTAI,JUNAGADH vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR 1(1), RKT, RAJKOT

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

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

2 SCC 387, taking into account of provision of section 253(5), and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take judicious view and condoned the delay

SMT. SHEETAL RASHMIN PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE I. T. O. WARD-2, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical\npurposes

sections": [ "143(3)", "142A", "143(2)", "142(1)", "56(2)(b)", "2(22B)", "55(2)(b)(i)", "194B", "253(5)" ], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable

SHIVEN CERAMIC LLP,MORBI vs. ITO, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.392/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19) M/S Shiven Ceramic Llp, बनाम Income Tax Officer National E-Assessment Centre, /Vs. 604/P5, 642/P1, Village Delhi Ghnutu, Lakhdhirpur Nr. Royal Touch Vitrified, Morbi-360 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adifs 8442 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2. The ld Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] erred on facts as also in law in dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 3. The ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in confirming addition made by AO of Rs.4,00,000/- being unsecured loan received from

SHRI SALIMBHAI SATARBHAI GAJIYANI,MALIYA HATINA, JUNAGADH vs. THE ITO WARD 2, JUNAGADH

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं /.Ita No.881/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Salimbhai Satarbhai Gajiyani Ito, Ward-2 बनाम Prop. Of Raj Enterprise Jungadh. Opp: High School Vs. Station Road, Malia Hatina Junagadh. Pan : Afppg 1405 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

2. Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, argued that appeal filed by the assessee, for the assessment year 2017-18, before the ld. CIT(A) was barred by limitation by 87 days. The assessee stated the reasons for delay, and requested the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay. The assessee stated that because of the mistake

M/S. GREEN EARTH BIOGAS PVT. LTD.,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

condone the delay.\n7. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that assessee before us is a\nprivate limited company.The assessee- company had filed return of income for\nthe assessment year (AY) 2017-18, on 13/10/2017, declaring total loss of\nRs.2,36,06,293/-. The assessee`s case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS.\nThe assessment was finalized

SHRI BHARATBHAI RAYSINH VALA,DEVALI DEDA, KODINAR, DIST. JUNAGADH vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), AMRELI, AMRELI

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

section 253(5) and the\ndecision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone the\ndelay, and admit the appeal and proceed further for hearing.\n5. Brief facts of the case that the appellant is an business of distribution and\nselling of milk products of Girnar Dairy Food Private Limited. The appellant\nhas no income except Income

SEASTEM LIMITED,JAMNAGAR vs. ACIT CIR - 1,, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 334/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Seastem Limited, Jamnagar Vs. Acit, Cir-1, Jamnagar 1 Avani Appartment, - Sarusection Road Income Tax Office, Jamnagar – 361001 Jamnagar - 361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahcs9428G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

2. Your honour may kindly appreciate that appellant is unaware of passing of order by Ld. CIT(A), which was served online. When appellant comes to know about dismissal of appeal by LD. CIT(A), immediately she has approached Chartered Accountant for filing of appeal. 3. Your honour may kindly appreciate that there was no ill motive behind not filling

DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,JUNAGADH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JUNAGADH

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 239/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2008-09) बनाम Damjibhai Lekharjibhai Thavrani Income-Tax Officer, C/O. Sarda & Sarda (Ca), Sakar 1St Vs. Ito Ward – 1 Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Opp. Income Tax Office, Bhootnath Rajkumar College, Chamber, Rajkot 360001 Junagadh – 362001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aeypt7701B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent)

2. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on facts in levying the penalty 8,40,37,155/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal as non-maintainable without condoning the delay in filing the appeal

SHRI NARENDRA DHARAMDAS GIDWANI,ANJAR KUTCH vs. THE ADDL. CIT, NFAC, , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 220/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Narendra Dharamdas Gidwani, The Commissioner Of Income Vs. Plot No. 29, Survey No. 193/1, Maitru Tax(Appeals), Residency Meghpar Borichi, Anjar, National Faceless Appeal Centre Kutch, (Nfac), Delhi, Income Tax Gujarat - 370110 Department, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akmpg6386M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chiranjeev Tandon, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per D. M. Sinha, Jm:

253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 6. After hearing the rival contention of both the parties, we perused the reason for late filing of appeal as submitted in the application for condonation of delay. That we find that there is sufficient cause for filing of the appeal not in time. There is no mistake of the assessee

BHAVESHKUMAR MAHENDRABHAI MANIYAR,JUNAGADH vs. THE ITO WARD-1, JUNAGADH., JUNAGADH

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

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Saini, Accountat Member & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.234/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) Bhavneshkumar Mahendrabhai Vs. Ito, Maniyar, Ward – 1, Prop.Of Shree Hari Enterprise, Junagadh Shop No.2, Rajkamal Apartment, Junagadh, Junagadh - 362001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afdpm3866Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

2. The appeal filed by assessee is barred by limitation of 249 days in terms of provisions of section 253(3) of the Act. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) filed an application for condonation of delay

MATEL HARDWARE,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WD 3(1)(1), RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 204/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) Matel Hardware Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shrddha Park Street No.2, Shrddha 3(1)(1), Rajkot, Aaykar बनाम Park Main Road, Ram Chowk, Bhawan, Rajkot-360001 /Vs. Rajkot-360002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aazfm6158L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2. The CIT(A) erred in making baseless addition of entire cash sales of Rs.97,88,124/- wrongly presuming that the assessee got 100% net profit from the entire cash sales. Your appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend or withdraw the ground(s) of appeal at the time or before the hearing of this appeal.” 3. The appeal

BHAVESH ISHWARLAL PANCHASARA,RAJKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.95/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Bhavesh Ishwarlal बनाम Assistant Commissioner Of Panchasara Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Rajkot /Vs. 1, Mehulnagar Main Road, Near Khodiyar Temple, Rajkot-360 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aodpp 1375 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2. The learned CIT(A) has erred on facts as well as in law by making addition in income of Rs.2,30,24,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed wrongly initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 4. That

VAGHANI BROTHERS,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(1), RKT, 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.159/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) Vaghani Brothers Vs. The Ito, Ward – 2(1)(1), Rajkot Bus Stand Road, Nr. Buu Stand, Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Dhoraji (Guj) - 360410 Road, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabfv5533C (Appellant) (Respondent)

2 of 4 Vaghani Brothers Dhorani AR very humbly submitted that there is no deliberate lethargy, negligence, mala fide intention or ulterior motive of assessee in making delay and the assessee does not stand to derive any benefit because of delay. He further submitted that the reason of delay is as explained in the condonation of delay-application/affidavit

BILIYA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LIMITED,MORBI, RAJKOT vs. ITO WARD 1, MORBI, MORBI

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 742/Rjt/2025 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Biliya Seva Sahkari Mandli Vs. Income Tax Office, Aayakar Limited Vibhag, J.K. Chamber, National At. Biliya, Tal. Morbi, Gujarat, Highway-8-A, At- Lalpar, Morvi 363641 (Gujarat) Morbi 363642 (Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabab3498H (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view and condone delay in filing the appeal. At the same time, as agreed by both sides and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit and condone the delay of 100 days and appeal is heard

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)

2. The rejection of the final registration application and cancellation of provisional registration may please be deleted, on the grounds that the Animal Lovers Charitable Trust appellant trust is genuine an on the ground that trustees oft eh trust were technically not sound and hence must be given a final opportunity to submit the required documents to prove the genuineness