SHRI SHARAD M. KUMBHANI,AMRELI vs. THE PR. CIT-3, RAJKOT

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

Bench: The Sro, Rajula Vide Document No. 578/2014 On 07.04.2014 For A Sale Consideration Of Rs. 1,37,24,875/-. However, The Sro, Rajula Has Assessed/Valued The Said Land For Rs. 2,51,93,900/- As Per Jantry/Guideline Value & Stamp Duty. Therefore The Difference Between The Jantry Value & The Sale Consideration Is Of Rs. 1,14,69,025/- Should Be Added As Income As Per Section 50C Of The Act.

Section 54B, the assessee must establish that the land should be used for agriculture purpose for a period of two years prior to the date of transfer. The assessee has not produced any documentary evidence to substantiate that the lands were used for agriculture purpose to claim deduction u/s 54B of the Act. It is seen that the land

DUSHYANT BHARATBHAI MEHTA,RAJKOT vs. ITO WD-(2)(1)(2) , RAJKOT

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

disallowance of claim\nunder section 54F of the Act, made by the Assessing officer which is beyond the scope\nof limited scrutiny under CASS.\nITA No. 422/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16\nDushyant Bharatbhai Metha Vs. ITO\n(4) The assessee craves leave to add to, amend, alter or delete all or any of the\nforegoing grounds of appeal.\n3. The relevant

SHREEJI CERAMIC INDUSTRIES,MORBI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.266/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Shreeji Ceramic Industries, The Principal Commissioner Of Vs. 8/A National Highway, Lalpar Income Tax – 1, Morbi - 363642 Rajkot "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs8846B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit (Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajkot – 1 [In Short, “The Ld. Pcit”], Dated 30.03.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows.

disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act whereas the SCN under section 263 was regarding the FIFO method of valuation of closing stock adopted by the Assessee. There were, as rightly noted by the ITAT, unconnected issue s and the assessment order could not have been held to be “erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue” when

PARAS MEHTA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD 2 (1) (2), RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance of claim under section 54F of the Act, made by the Assessing officer which is beyond the scope of limited scrutiny under CASS.” 13. We have gone through the assessment order. As it is evident from the recital of the Assessing Officer, on page no. 1 of his order, stating that : “the case was selected for limited scrutiny assessment