SHRI PRASHANT TRIVEDI, PROP. OF KUDOS SHIPPING CORPORATION,,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

271(1)(c) of the Act.” 3. The fact in brief is that the assessee on behalf of M/s. Faber Ship Brokers APS, Denmark has filed a provisional and final return of income on I.T.A Nos. 572 & 573/Rjt/2012 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No 3 Shri Prashant Trivedi vs. ITO 13th May, 2009 without paying freight tax claiming the benefit

PATEL KELAVANI MANDAL,TAPOVAN SHAIKSHNIK SANKUL vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 2, RAJKOT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 278/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Patel Kelavani Mandal, Junagadh. Vs. The Ito (E), Ward – 2, Tapovan Shaikshnik Sankul, Aaykar Bhavan, Bilkha Road, Race Course Ring Road, Junagadh - 362001 Rajkot - 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabtp7542H (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceeding are initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Subject to the above remarks and on the basis of data made available on record. Total income of the assessee trust is determined as under: Income as per return of Income Rs. Nil/- Additions as per para6 & 7 above: Rs.28,71,545/- Rounded off u/s. 288A... Rs.28,71

JITENDRABHAI DEVAJIBHAI BODAR,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as not admitted”

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

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c), 271F of the Act” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 25.01.20214 in the prescribed Form, ITR-4 declaring total income of Rs.4,29,650/-, (including income earned from Commission and Interest Income), after deduction under chapter

SHRI MANOJ DHANJIBHAI PANSURIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8. That, the findings of the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) are not justified and are bad-in-law. 9. The appellant craves

SHRI SUBIR YUDHISTHIR DAS,BELAPUR, THANE (MAHARASTRA) vs. THE CIT(A)-13, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

71 Sector No. 15, Ahmedabad CBD Belapur, Thane, Maharashtra- 400614 [PAN No.ALBPD9358C] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Kushiram Jadhvani, A.R. Respondent by: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01.06.2023 09.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SHRI ANIRUDDHSINH J. SOLANKI,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the only effective Ground of Appeal is against the addition of Rs. 31.31 Crores. The assessee along with other persons at Rajkot were involved

SHRI ANIRUDDHSINH J. SOLANKI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the only effective Ground of Appeal is against the addition of Rs. 31.31 Crores. The assessee along with other persons at Rajkot were involved

NAYNA MUKESHKUMAR KOTECHA,DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statical purpose

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

Penalty proceeding will also be initiated upon finalization of the Draft Assessment Order. The assessee may prefer an appeal against this Draft Assessment Order before the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) within 30 days. If no such communication is received within a period of 30 days, it will be deemed as acceptance of this Draft Order by the assessee

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

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, in IT(SS) No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.11 To 20/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner Of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Adepk 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.21 To 23/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2014-15, 2016-17 &2017-18 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta Kangad Vs. Estate”, 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, Rajkot-360001 Gandhidham-370 201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aabca 8202 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.15/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2019-20 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Hetab Shamjibhai Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bbz-South-60, Zanda Chowk, Vs. “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aqtpk 7484 M (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

penalty or any harsh action under the Income tax Act or any other law shall be initiated by the Department or any other department on such voluntary offered ad-hoc estimated business income. The assessee submitted that source of cash and gold found / seized during the course of search has satisfactorily been explained and hence, there is no case

ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. GRENIC TILES PVT LTD, MORBI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

penalty\nproceedings are also unwarranted and deserve to be quashed.\n10. Without prejudice to the above your assessee craves leave to add, amend,\nalter, vary or withdraw all or any grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of\nappeal.\"\n4. First, we shall adjudicate revenue's appeal in ITA No. 682/Rjt/2025. The\nfacts necessary for disposal of the revenue

GRENIC TILES PRIVATE LIMITED,WANKANER-MORBI vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 1(1) RKT, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

penalty\nproceedings are also unwarranted and deserve to be quashed.\n10. Without prejudice to the above your assessee craves leave to add, amend,\nalter, vary or withdraw all or any grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of\nappeal.\"\n4. First, we shall adjudicate revenue's appeal in ITA No. 682/Rjt/2025. The\nfacts necessary for disposal of the revenue