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)

section 50C is not applicable. 5. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming by making addition of Rs. 3,06,284/- u/s 68 for agricultural income disclosed by appellant for want of supporting documents. 6. Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) erred in law as well as fact by confirming addition

HARPALSINH PRUTHVISINH GOHIL,HARPALNIVAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(5), RAJKOT

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

condoned the delay after considering the explanation of the assessee and the submissions of the revenue. The Tribunal noted that a valuation report dated 30.11.2020 was submitted, which was not available to the Assessing Officer when the assessment order was passed on 04.12.2019.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "147", "50C

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

50C, is against the provisions of the law. 3. The appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year (A.Y.) 2016-17 is barred by limitation by 80 days. The assessee has moved a petition for condonation of delay requesting the Bench to condone the delay. Learned Counsel for the assessee, explained the reasons for delay, stating that order passed

SHRI RAMNIKLAL HIRJI PATEL,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-2, BHUJ, BHUJ-KUTCH

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

condonation, supported by Supreme Court precedent. The Tribunal also noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had not decided the appeal as per the mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act and had passed an ex-parte order.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "144", "143(3)", "147", "50C", "253(5)", "250(6)" ], "issues": "Whether the delay

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