THE ITO WARD-1 (2) (1),, RAJKOT vs. SHRI KHRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

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

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(2)(4),, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

THE ITO WARD-1 (2) (1),, RAJKOT vs. SHRI KHRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2),, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT vs. BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

SHRI BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,,RAJKOT vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271 (1)(c) of the IT Act is initiated for concealing the particulars of income." 3.12.2. Same finding has been given by the A.O. for the other assessment years in all the case of above mentioned appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed detailed submission against the additions made. The appellant contended that they are engaged

THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM vs. M/S SWAMINARAYAN VIJAY CARRY TRADE PVT. LTD.,, BHUJ

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed&Smt. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं.Ita Nos.333&399/Rjt/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Acit Vs. M/S. Swaminarayan Gandhidham Circle, Vijay Carry Trade (P) Gandhidham-Kutch Ltd. Svtc House, Bhuj- Mirzapar Highway, Bhuj- Kutch-370001 Pan:Aad Cs0 141 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961and against the order dated 30.08.2016 passed by the CIT(A)-3, Rajkot under sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 22.09.2014 passed by the Ld. JCIT, Gandhidham respectively, both for Financial Year 2011-12. 2. Since

THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM vs. M/S SWAMINARAYAN VIJAY CARRY TRADE PVT. LTD.,, BHUJ

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed&Smt. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं.Ita Nos.333&399/Rjt/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Acit Vs. M/S. Swaminarayan Gandhidham Circle, Vijay Carry Trade (P) Gandhidham-Kutch Ltd. Svtc House, Bhuj- Mirzapar Highway, Bhuj- Kutch-370001 Pan:Aad Cs0 141 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961and against the order dated 30.08.2016 passed by the CIT(A)-3, Rajkot under sec. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 22.09.2014 passed by the Ld. JCIT, Gandhidham respectively, both for Financial Year 2011-12. 2. Since