SHRI BHAKTINAGAR CO OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,RAJKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

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

reassessment after verified claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. Hence, the assessment was against the claim of deduction

ACIT, CIR-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI RAJKOT DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD, RAJKOT

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.188/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Rajkot District Co-Operative Bank Tax, Circle-1 (1), Rajkot Limited Room No.502, Aayakar Bhawan, Jilla Bankbhavan, Kasturba Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot- Opp: Chaudhary High School, 360001 Rajkot 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaar0564K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr : 09/06 /2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08 /2025

deduction efficiently, reducing the likelihood of disputes and reassessments. 3. Ensuring Integrity of Financial Reporting: Segregating eligible business profits upholds

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the\ndepreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for the Assessment

THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S SWAPNALOK DEVELOPERS, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

reassessment framed under section 147 of the Act as invalid by observing that the claim of deduction was ITO vs. M/s.Swapnalok

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

deduction under chapter VI of Rs.1,10,000/-. The case was selected for u/s 147 for reopening the case for reassessment

SHRI MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN ,GANDHIDHAM vs. THEACIT, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings which relate to the income which has escaped assessment where the assessment where the assesee would be entitle to put forward the claim for deduction

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings which relate to the income which has escaped assessment where the assessment where the assesee would be entitle to put forward the claim for deduction

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings which relate to the income which has escaped assessment where the assessment where the assesee would be entitle to put forward the claim for deduction

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment proceedings which relate to the income which has escaped assessment where the assessment where the assesee would be entitle to put forward the claim for deduction

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

reassessment under section 147, is of immense importance as in this case initial assessment was made under section 143(3) of the Act and deduction

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

reassessment under section 147, is of immense importance as in this case initial assessment was made under section 143(3) of the Act and deduction

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

reassessment under section 147, is of immense importance as in this case initial assessment was made under section 143(3) of the Act and deduction

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

reassessment under section 147, is of immense importance as in this case initial assessment was made under section 143(3) of the Act and deduction

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

reassessment proceedings the assessee objected to the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act for the reasons furnished by the Assessing Officer. The same were negated by the Assessing Officer and made addition by way of ITA Nos.212 & 213/RJT/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page 4 of 5 disallowance and claimed deduction

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

reassessment proceedings the assessee objected to the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act for the reasons furnished by the Assessing Officer. The same were negated by the Assessing Officer and made addition by way of ITA Nos.212 & 213/RJT/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page 4 of 5 disallowance and claimed deduction

SMT. HARSHIDABEN M. POBARU,,JAMNAGAR. vs. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, , JAMNAGAR.

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.371/Rjt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T, Smt. Harshidaben M. Pobaru, Circle-1, Vs. “Gokul’’, Park Colony, Jamnagar. Jamnagar-361008. Pan: Acmpp9140J

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act are not justified in the case of Deloitte Haskins & Sells VS DCIT reported in 90 taxmann.com 421. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: “All these details were on record before Assessing Officer, when the original assessment proceedings were being made and there was nothing outside of the record

SHRI NAGICHANA MAHILA DOODH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,AT. NAGICHANA, TAL. MANGROL, DIST. JUNAGADH vs. THE ITO WARD-1, JUNAGADH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

deduction u/s 80P, in theassessee`s case is correct. 10. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 11. Shri D.M. Rindani, Learned Counsel for the assessee, argued that the reasons were recorded on different footing to tax the cash credit transaction to the tune of Rs.2,87,70,000/-. However