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

iii) Hon'ble ITAT, Rajkot Bench Rajkot in the case of ITO vs. Admiracle Advertising\nPvt. Ltd, ITA No. 07/Rjt/2010 and 649/Rj1/2010.\n14. Thus there is no question of any concealment of income in respect of addition\nmade on notional basis and therefore, proposal to levy u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act may\nkindly be dropped.”\n8\nITA No.76

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

iii) Hon'ble ITAT, Rajkot Bench Rajkot in the case of ITO vs. Admiracle Advertising\nPvt. Ltd, ITA No. 07/Rjt/2010 and 649/Rj1/2010.\n14. Thus there is no question of any concealment of income in respect of addition\nmade on notional basis and therefore, proposal to levy u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act may\nkindly be dropped

M/S. UNITED ENGINEERS, RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

271(1)(c) of the Act. In the present case, the assessee has filed the income tax return under the provisions of section 153C of the Act declaring income of Rs. 4,43,340.00 which was accepted in the assessment framed under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27-12-2016 without making

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

VALLABHBHAI BHAGVANJIBHAI KATHIRIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(10) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA, No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 510, 511 & 512/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Vallabhbhai Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Ito Ward 2(10) Jamnagar Kathiriya Aayakar Bhavan, Jamnagar, Khitadia, Jamnagar, Jamnagar - 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 Pan No. - Αυτρκ7716N (Appellant) (Respondent)

iii) Penalty order-ITA No.530/Rjt/2025 - Α.Υ. 2015-16 - Penalty u/s.271F of the Act Therefore, above penalties are deleted and above appeals of the assessee, are allowed. 20. Now, we shall take assessee`s remaining appeals for assessment year 2013- 14 and for assessment year 2014–15, and for assessment year 2016-17, the details of these appeals, assessment year

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides 22. mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable by him, which shall not be less than , but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment