DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

1)(b) has been followed by taking\napproval from the specified authority. However, as submitted above, there is no\nmention of asset or expenditure represented by the alleged-escaped income and\nhence, the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by the limitation period of\ntime prescribed u/s. 149 of the Act.In view of the above

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

1)(b) has been followed by taking\napproval from the specified authority. However, as submitted above, there is no\nmention of asset or expenditure represented by the alleged-escaped income and\nhence, the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by the limitation period of\ntime prescribed u/s. 149 of the Act.In view of the above

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, RAJKOT., RAJKOT

1)(b) has been followed by taking\napproval from the specified authority. However, as submitted above, there is no\nmention of asset or expenditure represented by the alleged-escaped income and\nhence, the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by the limitation period of\ntime prescribed u/s. 149 of the Act.In view of the above

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

1)(b) has been followed by taking\napproval from the specified authority. However, as submitted above, there is no\nmention of asset or expenditure represented by the alleged-escaped income and\nhence, the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by the limitation period of\ntime prescribed u/s. 149 of the Act.In view of the above

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-3(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. SONPAL EXPORTS PVT. LTD., RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 29/Rjt/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Dcit, Circle – 3(1), Vs. M/S. Sonpal Exports Pvt. Ltd. Rajkot Aayakar Bhavan, Room Dhari Bagsara Road, Nr. Ice No. 114, 1St Floor, Race Course Factory, Amreli Ring Road, Rajkot Pan No.: Aajcs0177N (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am; By Way Of This Appeal, The Revenue, Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 16.11.2017, Passed By The Learned Cit(A), In The Matter Of Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Grievances Raised By The Revenue, Which Are Interconnected & Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 13,96,33,023/- Holding That Provision Of Section 195 Will Not Be Applicable. 2. On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Erred In Ignoring The Facts That The Assessee Has Failed To Prove The Genuineness Of Foreign Commission Expenses Before The A.O. 3. It Is, Therefore, Prayed That The Order Of The C.I.T. (A) May Be Set Aside & That Of The A.O. Be Restored To The Above Extent. Dcit Vs. M/S. Sonpal Export Pvt. Ltd.

149 ITD 0361 (Chennai), (iii) V. DENADAYALAVEL 33 CCH 0322 (Chen Trib), (iv) Modem Insulator LTD. 30 CCH 0193 (Jaipur), (v) Transformers And Electricals Kerala Ltd. 66 SOT 0110 (Cochin), (vi) CLSA Limited 160 TTJ 0001 (Mumbai). Therefore, the decisions relied upon by the assessing officer are distinguishable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, if the income

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

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

Section 149(1)(b) of I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That, the Ld. AO has wrongly passed the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly set-aside the denial of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. 5. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly set-aside

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

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

Section 149(1)(b) of I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That, the Ld. AO has wrongly passed the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly set-aside the denial of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. 5. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly set-aside

BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 247 To 250 & 260/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 2018-19 & 2010-11 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Income-Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji Industrial Room No.311, 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Estate, Rajkot-36 003 Vs. Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.254 To 256/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of Income- C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji बनाम/ Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, Room No.311, Industrial Estate, Rajkot-36 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Race Vs. 003 Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (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 & Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

disallowance made by the assessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to be deleted, may kindly be deleted. [This is ground No.2 in assessee`s appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year 2010–11, ground No.2 in assessee`s appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year Bhavani Industries India LLP ITA Nos.247

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 247 To 250 & 260/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 2018-19 & 2010-11 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Income-Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji Industrial Room No.311, 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Estate, Rajkot-36 003 Vs. Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.254 To 256/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of Income- C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji बनाम/ Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, Room No.311, Industrial Estate, Rajkot-36 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Race Vs. 003 Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (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 & Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

disallowance made by the assessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to be deleted, may kindly be deleted. [This is ground No.2 in assessee`s appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year 2010–11, ground No.2 in assessee`s appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year Bhavani Industries India LLP ITA Nos.247

BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ADDI. CIT, RANGE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

disallowance made by the\nassessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to\nbe deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n5\nBhavani Industries India LLP\nITA

ASSISTANT COMMISSINER OF IINCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

disallowance made by the\nassessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to\nbe deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n5\nBhawani Industries India LLP\nITA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

disallowance made by the\nassessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to\nbe deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n5\nBhavani Industries India LLP\nITA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

disallowance made by the\nassessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to\nbe deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n5\nBhawani Industries India LLP\nITA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

disallowance made by the\nassessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to\nbe deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year\n5\nBhavani Industries India LLP\nITA

SHRI RAJKOT DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD. RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: us, the error noted in the assessment order passed in the case of the assessee under Section 143(3) of the Act for the impugned year i.e. AY 2017-18 was that the assessee’s claim of deduction for creation of special reserve from the profit of “eligible business” as per Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act had been allowed in excess by the Assessing Officer without properly examining the calculation of the claim submitted by the assessee.

149/- (Paper- book page No.39); (ii) Assessee’s reply to the aforesaid notice under Section 142(1) giving the break-up of “any other amount allowable as deduction” including therein the deduction claimed under Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act for special reserve created amounting to Rs.4,49,94,107/-. (Paper-book page No.42); (iii) Detailed computation, being statement

BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

disallowance made by the assessing officer and retained by CIT(A), is totally unjustified, uncalled for and deserves to be deleted, may kindly be deleted.\n[This is ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.254/RJT/2024, for assessment year 2010-11, ground No.2 in assessee's appeal in ITA No.255/RJT/2024, for assessment year 2012-13, ground No.2 in assessee

SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT

disallowances as per various provisions of the Income-tax Act for\nincurring cash expenses and violation of other provisions also needs to be\nconsidered before arriving at the value of real income earned from the uncounted\nShri Shamjibhai Shadabhai Kangad & Ors.\nIT(SS)A Nso.11 to 23/RJT/2022 and Ors. (AYs: 2011-12 to 2018-19 & Ors..)\n22\ntransactions recorded

SHRI PRAFUL KHETSHIBHAI SOLANKI,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (2) (5), , RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance to Rs. 54,676/- in the name of the assessee and deleted the balance addition of Rs. 45,324/-. Before Ld. CIT(Appeals) the assessee submitted that proceedings under Section 148 is invalid as the amount income escaping assessment was less than Rs. 1 lakh. However, Ld. Praful Khetshibhai Solanki vs. ITO Asst.Year –2007-08 CIT(A) dismissed