BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

30 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 51clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai557Chennai495Delhi417Kolkata333Hyderabad252Bangalore246Pune229Ahmedabad199Jaipur162Karnataka144Chandigarh128Nagpur95Lucknow59Indore58Cuttack54Cochin42Surat42Amritsar41Calcutta38Raipur35Visakhapatnam34Rajkot30SC19Jodhpur16Telangana13Patna11Guwahati9Agra8Jabalpur8Varanasi6Allahabad6Orissa5Dehradun4Rajasthan4Panaji3Ranchi2Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income15Section 142(1)14Section 143(3)14Section 206C(7)12Section 206C(6)12Section 14711Section 14811Section 69A10Section 80P(2)(d)

KANTABEN VAJUBHAI PAGHADAL,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 552/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.552/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Kantaben Vajubhai Paghadal Vs. It-Office, New Aayakar At- Charan Samadhiyala, Bhawan, Jetpur – 360370(Gujarat) Rajkot - 360370 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Cxmpp2962D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145BSection 250Section 56

condone the delay. 3. On merit, Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted that the issue involved in the appeal of the assessee is that assessee had received interest on enhanced compensation of Rs. 18,51,082/- on account of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land, which is exempted under section

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

10
Penalty9
Limitation/Time-bar9
Deduction8

SHRI AKBAR UMARBHAI KHIRA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 (5),, JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 439/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, DR
Section 142(1)Section 56(2)(viii)

condone delay of 51 days in filing of first appeal without appreciating that appellant was located in village of Jamnagar District and being not literate and being under depression due to personal difficulties could not approach, Chartered Accountant situated at Ahmedabad to understand implications arising out of assessment order and to get the appeal prepared and filed before

SHRI RAMJIBHAI ARJANBHAI PANSARA,JAMNAGAR vs. THEINCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5),, JAMNAGAR

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

ITA 436/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, DR
Section 56(2)(viii)

condone delay of 51 days in filing of first appeal without appreciating that appellant was located in village of Jamnagar District and being not much literate and being under depression due to personal difficulties could not approach Chartered Accountant situated at Ahmedabad to understand implications arising out of assessment order and to get the appeal prepared and filed before

SHRI RAMNIKLAL D. AGHERA,KESHOD vs. THE ITO WARD-1,, JUNAGADH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

condoning the delay of 18 days in filing of the present appeal. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee agriculturalist and holds 18.66 acres of land. For Assessment Year 2011-12, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs. 11,50,000/- in his savings bank account maintained with the State

APEX IRRIGATION,RAJKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

ITA 94/RJT/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 40Section 5Section 68

section 253(5) of the Act empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a "sufficient cause" for not Apex Irrigation presenting appeal within prescribed time. In the interest of justice, we take a judicious view and we condoned the delay in filing appeal by 461 days 7. Brief facts of the case

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, MORBI vs. M/S. KISHAN PLUS MINARALS, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue (In ITA No

ITA 124/RJT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.124/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.02/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Acit, Cent.Cir.2 M/S.Kishan Plus Minerals बनाम Rajkot. Jetpar Road, Nr. Pavadiyali Temple, Jasmatgadh Vs. Morbi. Pan : Aaqfk4689P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Counsel राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2025 (Originally Heard Refixed On 05.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

delay is condoned 6. Now first, we shall adjudicate, the Revenue`s appeal in ITA No.124/RJT/2021. We advert to the relevant facts. The assessee has e-filed his return of Income, on 13.10.2018, declaring total income at Rs. 0/- The assessee has shown total business income of Rs. 10,04,597/- and also claimed the set-off of brought forward

ANUP A. SHAH,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 106/RJT/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 106/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2005-2006 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A

condone the delay in filing of appeal for 30 days and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The grounds raised in this appeal are without prejudice to one another. 2. The Learned CIT(A)-2 erred in law and on facts in confirming the penalty u/s.271

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

ITA 425/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

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:

For Appellant: ShriMehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44A

51,554/- by estimating income @ 3% on work done on sub let basis and The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the same. 4. Ld. Assessing officer has erred on facts and in law in making addition of Rs.9,92,956/- by estimating income @ 5.4% on work done through sub contractors

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

ITA 697/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

51,445/- and Rs. 12,16,576/-, respectfully, and appeal in ITA No.697/RJT/2024 relates to penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act 1961. 4. The appeals in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, and in ITA No.697/RJT/2024, filed for Assessment Years, 2018-19 & 2020-21, all are barred by limitation by 90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition

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

ITA 493/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

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)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

51,445/- and Rs. 12,16,576/-, respectfully, and appeal in ITA No.697/RJT/2024 relates to penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act 1961. 4. The appeals in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, and in ITA No.697/RJT/2024, filed for Assessment Years, 2018-19 & 2020-21, all are barred by limitation by 90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition

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

ITA 492/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

51,445/- and Rs. 12,16,576/-, respectfully, and appeal in ITA No.697/RJT/2024 relates to penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act 1961. 4. The appeals in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024, and in ITA No.697/RJT/2024, filed for Assessment Years, 2018-19 & 2020-21, all are barred by limitation by 90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 44/RJT/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

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)

section 68, 69, 69A to 69D of the IT Act and as such, in the light of non- disputed fact that unexplained credit whether found in the bank statement of the assessee, who regularly maintain books of accounts. Ld. ITAT should have agreed to legal- plea of the Revenue that till onus with respect to identity, credit worthiness and genuineness

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

ITA 358/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

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.

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

section; (i) 80P(2)(a)(i) - Rs.8,06,042/- (ii) 80P(2)(a)(iv) - Rs.1,06,063/- (iii) 80P(2)(d) - Rs.3,51,828/- 4. Thereafter, the appellant was in receipt of communication for not granting deduction of Rs. 1263 933/- claimed in the return of income u/s 80P of the Act, stating that the assessee not filed Return within

ISHWARBHAI SHANTILAL PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 679/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri PM Jagaseth C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 69ASection 69C

51 days in filing the present appeal for which the assessee has filed the affidavit stating the reasons therein. The reasons appear to be genuine, hence the delay is condoned. 3. The Assessing Officer has made addition on account of unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act amounting to Rs. 10,17,870/- being expenditure incurred on the purchase from

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

ITA 50/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Thacker, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 250

delay is hereby being condoned. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the office premises of the assessee on 28-11-2014 for verification of TDS compliance. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing of salt, providing liquid storage tank

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

ITA 49/RJT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Thacker, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 250

delay is hereby being condoned. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the office premises of the assessee on 28-11-2014 for verification of TDS compliance. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing of salt, providing liquid storage tank

SHREE SANATAN ASHRAM CHARITABLE TRUST,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (4),, AMRELI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.178/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shree Santan Ashram The I.T.O. बनाम/ Charitable Trust Ward-2(4) Vs. Shree Chamunda Temple Amreli Vankiya Bhod Khamba "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajts 7402 B .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : None (Written Submission) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

51,1407- 8. In any case the most Hon. Bench may kindly consider 1. To allow appeal as prayed for ............... And /or 2. May restore the matter back to the file of Ld. A.O. for fresh adjudication as per decisions given in the case of Ghelabhai Popatbhai Shingala (copy enclosed) by this Most Hon. Vary Bench. Shree Santan Ashram Charitable

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

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

ITA 549/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(b)

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

KAKADIYA PARIVARNA KULDEVI SHREE BRAHMANI KHODIYAR TRUST,AMRELI vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION, WARD(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

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

ITA 140/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiassessment Year: (2021-2022) Kakadiya Parivarna Kuldevi Sghree The Ito Exemption Brahmani Khodiyar Trust Ward-2, Rajkot. Vs. Jaysukhbhai Laljibhai Kakadiya Jarkhida, Ta. Lathi, Amreli Pan : Aadtk 1328 E (Assessee) (Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, ld.Sr.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24

51,250/- claimed by the assessee u/s 11(I)(d) of the Act, being voluntary contribution received as corpus. 3. The learned ADDL/JCIT (A)-l, Pune, erred in confirming the action of the CPC, Bangalore in not giving deduction of Rs.16,373/-, claimed by the assessee u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act. 4. The learned ADDL/JCIT (A)-l, Pune

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

ITA 52/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

51 to 54/Rjt/2023 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2016-17) Shri Babulal Miyaram Gadri, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Shed No.427, GIDC Phase-II, TDS -3, Dared, Jamnagar-361005 Jamnagar [PAN No.ANHPG8759L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement