SHITALBEN JYOTIKUMAR RAYCHURA,PORBANDAR vs. ITO, PORBANDAR

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

section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short\n\"the Act\"), vide order dated 14.11.2019.\n2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:\n1) That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or\nat the time of hearing of appeal.\n2) On the facts and circumstances

JAMNADAS RAMJIBHAI VIKANI,MANAVADAR vs. DCIT, INT.TAX.RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Block Period: 1.4.89 To 8.6.1999) Shri Jamnadas R Vikani The Deputy बनाम/ 22, Kailashnagar, Mitadi Commissioner Of Income Vs. Road, Manavadar Tax Cirlce-1(1), Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aavpv6232E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/06/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 28/06/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Four Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Sets Of Orders; Two Dated 16.07.2003 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot In Ita Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & And Other Two Orders Dated 27.01.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad In Ita Nos. 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 (Hereinafter

5- same ground confirming the order imposing penalty under Section 271E of the Act to the tune of Rs.23,45,415/- passed by the Ld. AO alleging contravention of the provision of Section 269T of the Act was filed by the appellant. Both the appeals are barred by limitation for 6091 days. 12. The appellant, however, on 13.11.2021 filed further

JAMNDAS RAMJIBHAI VIKANI, MANAVADAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Block Period: 1.4.89 To 8.6.1999) Shri Jamnadas R Vikani The Deputy बनाम/ 22, Kailashnagar, Mitadi Commissioner Of Income Vs. Road, Manavadar Tax Cirlce-1(1), Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aavpv6232E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/06/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 28/06/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Four Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Sets Of Orders; Two Dated 16.07.2003 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot In Ita Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & And Other Two Orders Dated 27.01.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad In Ita Nos. 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 (Hereinafter

5- same ground confirming the order imposing penalty under Section 271E of the Act to the tune of Rs.23,45,415/- passed by the Ld. AO alleging contravention of the provision of Section 269T of the Act was filed by the appellant. Both the appeals are barred by limitation for 6091 days. 12. The appellant, however, on 13.11.2021 filed further

JAMNADAS RAMJIBHAI VIKANI,MANAVADAR vs. DCIT, INT.TAX, , RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Block Period: 1.4.89 To 8.6.1999) Shri Jamnadas R Vikani The Deputy बनाम/ 22, Kailashnagar, Mitadi Commissioner Of Income Vs. Road, Manavadar Tax Cirlce-1(1), Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aavpv6232E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/06/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 28/06/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Four Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Sets Of Orders; Two Dated 16.07.2003 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot In Ita Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & And Other Two Orders Dated 27.01.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad In Ita Nos. 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 (Hereinafter

5- same ground confirming the order imposing penalty under Section 271E of the Act to the tune of Rs.23,45,415/- passed by the Ld. AO alleging contravention of the provision of Section 269T of the Act was filed by the appellant. Both the appeals are barred by limitation for 6091 days. 12. The appellant, however, on 13.11.2021 filed further

JAMNDAS RAMJIBHAI VIKANI,MANAVADAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Block Period: 1.4.89 To 8.6.1999) Shri Jamnadas R Vikani The Deputy बनाम/ 22, Kailashnagar, Mitadi Commissioner Of Income Vs. Road, Manavadar Tax Cirlce-1(1), Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aavpv6232E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/06/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 28/06/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Four Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Sets Of Orders; Two Dated 16.07.2003 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot In Ita Nos. 215 & 216/Rjt/2022 & And Other Two Orders Dated 27.01.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad In Ita Nos. 72 & 73/Rjt/2023 (Hereinafter

5- same ground confirming the order imposing penalty under Section 271E of the Act to the tune of Rs.23,45,415/- passed by the Ld. AO alleging contravention of the provision of Section 269T of the Act was filed by the appellant. Both the appeals are barred by limitation for 6091 days. 12. The appellant, however, on 13.11.2021 filed further

INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT BRANCH,SOMNATH vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 180 & 181/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (Na) Indian Red Cross Society Gir Somnath Cit(Exemption) Vs. District Branch Room No. 609, Floor No. 6, Block No.4, Divya Apartment, Opp. Sbi Ayakar Bhavan (Vejalpur), 100Ft Bank, 80Ft Road, Veraval, Gir-Somnath, Road, Ahmedabad - 380015 Gujarat-362266 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabai3231R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

condoned the delay in filing appeal by 209 days and heard the appeal on merit. 8. Brief facts of the case the application 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 26/12/2022 by the assessee in Form No. 10AB under Rule

INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT BRANCH,GIR SOMNATH vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 180 & 181/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (Na) Indian Red Cross Society Gir Somnath Cit(Exemption) Vs. District Branch Room No. 609, Floor No. 6, Block No.4, Divya Apartment, Opp. Sbi Ayakar Bhavan (Vejalpur), 100Ft Bank, 80Ft Road, Veraval, Gir-Somnath, Road, Ahmedabad - 380015 Gujarat-362266 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabai3231R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

condoned the delay in filing appeal by 209 days and heard the appeal on merit. 8. Brief facts of the case the application 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 26/12/2022 by the assessee in Form No. 10AB under Rule

UMIYAJI STEEL INDUSTRIES,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT

The appeal is DISMISSED

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

5) of the Act, empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after explain by the assessee. After considering the reason explained by the Ld. AR. In the interest of justice, we take a judicious view that we condoned the delay of 294 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. 7. Brief facts of the case that the appellant

M/S COBRA KCL JV,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, TDS- CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 221 (1) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that there was a delay of 45 days in filing the present appeal for which affidavit was filed on behalf of the assessee. The reasons stated therein appear to be genuine

SURESHBHAI TEJABHAI KAKADIA,RAJKOT vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1, RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 45 & 50/Rjt/2026 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2017-18) Sureshbhai Tejabhai Kakadia Dcit/Acit, Cent – 1, Office No. 209, Anand Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax Office, Amruta Estate Vs. Mavdi Main Road, Rajkot-360004 Building Near Girnar Cinema, M.G.Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amspk7869B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], both dated 30.07.2025, which in turn arise out of separate assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, both dated

SURESHBHAI TEJABHAI KAKADIA,RAJKOT vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1, RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 45 & 50/Rjt/2026 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2017-18) Sureshbhai Tejabhai Kakadia Dcit/Acit, Cent – 1, Office No. 209, Anand Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax Office, Amruta Estate Vs. Mavdi Main Road, Rajkot-360004 Building Near Girnar Cinema, M.G.Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amspk7869B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], both dated 30.07.2025, which in turn arise out of separate assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, both dated

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)

45,48,224/- II Bharat I Bhatia 2008-09 85,60,64,053/- 26,68,19,216/- 59,92,44,837/- III Bharat I Bhatia 2009-10 3,29,38,258/- 98,81,477/- 2,30,56,781/- IV Bharat I Bhatia 2010-11 7,81,70,284/- 2,34,51,085/- 5,47,19,199/- V Bharat I. Bhatia

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. EXPERT PARTICLE BOARD, MORBI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee, ( in CO No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.139/Rjt/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Expert Particle Board बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Survey No.111, 8-A National Vs. Highway B/H. Bharatinagar Iti, Ravapar Nadi Morbi 363 642. Pan : Aahfe 0299 G आयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.142/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.05/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bhagvaji Prabhubhai बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Amrutiya, Meera Park-2 Vs. House No.1, Vavdi Road Morbi. Pan : Aiwpa 0121 A (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20 & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax

5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has duly investigated and applied his mind on the report of the DDIT, Investigation wing and after satisfying himself in framing the assessment on the basis of cogent material and relevant evidence on record. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI BHAGVANJI PRABHUBHAI AMRUTIYA, MORBI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee, ( in CO No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.139/Rjt/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Expert Particle Board बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Survey No.111, 8-A National Vs. Highway B/H. Bharatinagar Iti, Ravapar Nadi Morbi 363 642. Pan : Aahfe 0299 G आयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.142/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.05/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bhagvaji Prabhubhai बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Amrutiya, Meera Park-2 Vs. House No.1, Vavdi Road Morbi. Pan : Aiwpa 0121 A (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20 & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax

5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has duly investigated and applied his mind on the report of the DDIT, Investigation wing and after satisfying himself in framing the assessment on the basis of cogent material and relevant evidence on record. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

KRISHNA DEVELOPERS,JUNAGADH vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JUNAGADH RANGE, 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.425/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Krishna Developers Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income 1St Floor, Business Centre, Bud Stand, Tax Junagadh Range, L.B.S. Society, Income Tax Office, Junagadh – 362210 Junagadh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefk0952H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shrimehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

section is not arbitrary and it is not without basis, Thus, out of contract work of Rs. 31,01,73,972/-, self executed contract work is for Rs. 15,67,22,798/-. Krishna Developers v. ITO Net profit from this work is estimated @ 8% of the receipts. As regards contract work sub-let to other contractors

SHRI ASHWINKUMAR C. ZALA,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURENDRANAGAR CIRCLE,, SURENDRANAGAR

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

Bench: Appellate Commissioner With Effect From 01-03-2016, For All Persons Who Are Required To Furnish Their Return Of Income Electronically. Though The Assessee Vide Its Letter Dated 13-05- 2017 Explained He Already Filed Online Appeal Under Rule 45 On 01- 05-2017 With Acknowledgement No. 766897990010507. Due To Technical Reason That His Aadhar Was Not Able To Match Pan Data. There Was Technical Delay In Online Filing & Requested To Condone The Same. Though The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Extracted The Above Letter Of The Assessee In This Impugned Order, But Simply Dismissed The Appeal In Limine.

45 on 01- 05-2017 with Acknowledgement No. 766897990010507. Due to technical reason that his Aadhar was not able to match PAN data. There was technical delay in online filing and requested to condone the same. Though the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) extracted the above letter of the assessee in this impugned order, but simply dismissed the appeal

JITENDRABHAI DEVAJIBHAI BODAR,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as not admitted”

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

section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 08.02.2021, calling for the details and information on the issue on which the case was re-opened. But the assessee has again failed to e-furnish any information/ reply / details and supporting documents. The main issue involved in this case, which formed basis for initiation of proceedings

SHREE GAMARA SAMAJIK SEVA MANDAL,,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2014-15

45(II) ITCL 57 Chennai ITAT. 4. Where original trust deed as well as copy thereof along with income and expenditure account is already furnished. The rejection of 12A application will not approve. 27 SOT 423 Delhi ITAT. . 5. Even if there is some suspicion regarding income as well as resources rejection was not approve

SHRI BABULAL MIYARAM GADRI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, TDS-3,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the matter is being restored to the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

5. In appeal, the assessee submitted that the assessing officer did not give sufficient time to produce the necessary certificates since he was required to pass order in a hurried manner. The assessee submitted that the provisions of section 206C are not applicable in the assessee’s case for the reason that the goods have been sold to a person