THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

x Rs.750), hence, the same was disallowed by the assessing officer and added to the total income of the assessee. 53. Aggrieved, by the addition made by the assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. The ld CIT(A) observed that the stock

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

x Rs.750), hence, the same was disallowed by the assessing officer and added to the total income of the assessee. 53. Aggrieved, by the addition made by the assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. The ld CIT(A) observed that the stock

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

x Rs.750), hence, the same was disallowed by the assessing officer and added to the total income of the assessee. 53. Aggrieved, by the addition made by the assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. The ld CIT(A) observed that the stock

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACTIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

x 12)\nwas added to the total income of the assessee. In respect of this addition, penalty\nu/s 271(1)(c) was also initiated for concealment of income by furnishing\ninaccurate particulars of his income.\n15. During the penalty proceedings, the assessee submitted following return\nsubmission before the assessing officer, which is reproduced below:\n\"11. Further, as regard

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAKJOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

x 12)\nwas added to the total income of the assessee. In respect of this addition, penalty\nu/s 271(1)(c) was also initiated for concealment of income by furnishing\ninaccurate particulars of his income.\n15.\nDuring the penalty proceedings, the assessee submitted following return\nsubmission before the assessing officer, which is reproduced below:\n“11. Further, as regard

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

x 12)\nwas added to the total income of the assessee. In respect of this addition, penalty\nu/s 271(1)(c) was also initiated for concealment of income by furnishing\ninaccurate particulars of his income.\n15. During the penalty proceedings, the assessee submitted following return\nsubmission before the assessing officer, which is reproduced below:\n“11. Further, as regard

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SIX TWENTY REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT

x 11652.18 Sq. Mt. = Rs.5,25,97,941/-\n\n8. Penalty proceedings for underreporting of income in consequence of\nmisreporting as per provisions of section 270A of the Act are also initiated for the\naddition made above.\n\n9. Aggrieved by the various additions made by the assessing officer, the assessee\ncarried the matter in appeal before the learned

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. GANDHI REALITY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm

houses, bungalows, shops, flats, offices, tenements workshops, factory buildings, go-downs, warehouses, apartments, buildings, and civil works of all kinds. During the year under consideration, erstwhile Gandhi Realty (India) Private Limited having registered office at "Solitarie", Amin Marg Junction, 150 Ring Road, Nr. Pragati complex, Rajkot-360005 and PAN AACCG5189K (The Transferor Company 1" or "old GRIPL) and Crystal Organisers

SIX TWENTY REALTY PVT LTD,RAJOT vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

x 11652.18 Sq. Mt. = Rs.5,25,97,941/-\n\n8. Penalty proceedings for underreporting of income in consequence of\nmisreporting as per provisions of section 270A of the Act are also initiated for the\naddition made above.\n\n9. Aggrieved by the various additions made by the assessing officer, the assessee\ncarried the matter in appeal before the learned

SIX TWENTY REALTY PVT. LTD.,RAJKOT vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

x 11652.18 Sq. Mt. = Rs.5,25,97,941/-\n\n8. Penalty proceedings for underreporting of income in consequence of\nmisreporting as per provisions of section 270A of the Act are also initiated for the\naddition made above.\n\n9. Aggrieved by the various additions made by the assessing officer, the assessee\ncarried the matter in appeal before the learned