THE DCIT, (INTL. TAXN.), RAJKOT vs. M/S. KOREA SOUTH EAST POWER CO. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit (Intl. Taxn.) M/S.Korea South East Power Amruta Estate Co.Ltd. Room No.312 Mg Road बनाम/ C/O. P.V. Page & Co., Girnar Cinema 201, Sardar Griha, 198 L.T. Marg Vs. Rajkot Mumbai – 400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Pan : Ahvps 3555Q Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/12/2023

reassessment and imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal after considering the facts, deleted the penalty and observed

SURESH RATILAL LODARIA,ANJAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2, GANDHIDHAM., GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. In VC appellant submitted that if books of accounts are not maintained then penalty for non audit cannot

M/S SHREE RAJMOTI INDS.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE A. C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings. Though the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars for the Assessment Year 2011-12, however

MS ADITYA PLASTIC,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(1), RAJKOT-, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.185 & 186/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2013-14) बनाम/ M/S Aditya Plastic The Income Tax Officer Umiya Industrial Building Ward-3(1)(1) Vs. Near New Nehru Nagar Rajkot -360 001 Main Road, Dhebar Road Rajkot – 360 004 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajfa 4558 In (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench-: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cit(A)-[(In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 01/02/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Dated 29/09/2021Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”) Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows:

penalty was levied on the assessee for non-compliance of notice dated 29.02.2020, 04.02.2021, 20.02.2021. Since in this case the assessee filed an appeal against the appellate order before this Tribunal in ITA No. 185/Rjt/2024 for AY 2013-14, that the reassessment

MS ADITYA PLASTIC,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.185 & 186/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2013-14) बनाम/ M/S Aditya Plastic The Income Tax Officer Umiya Industrial Building Ward-3(1)(1) Vs. Near New Nehru Nagar Rajkot -360 001 Main Road, Dhebar Road Rajkot – 360 004 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajfa 4558 In (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench-: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cit(A)-[(In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 01/02/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Dated 29/09/2021Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”) Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows:

penalty was levied on the assessee for non-compliance of notice dated 29.02.2020, 04.02.2021, 20.02.2021. Since in this case the assessee filed an appeal against the appellate order before this Tribunal in ITA No. 185/Rjt/2024 for AY 2013-14, that the reassessment

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

penalties once the assessment order itself has been\nquashed by us. In this regard, we rely on the legal maxim \"Sublato fundamento\ncadit opus\" (meaning thereby that foundation being removed, structure/work\nfalls). Hence the initial action of the assessing officer in framing the reassessment

SHRI PRASHANT JENTILAL RAMANI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO 3 (1) (3), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, these Tax Appeals are also allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

SHRI PRASHANT JENTILAL RAMANI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO 3 (1) (3), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, these Tax Appeals are also allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

VIJAYABEN RAMBHAI VAJA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and I.T.A Nos. 281 to 284/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Smt. Vijayaben Rambhai Vaja Vs. ITO Penalties

VIJAYABEN RAMBHAI VAJA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and I.T.A Nos. 281 to 284/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Smt. Vijayaben Rambhai Vaja Vs. ITO Penalties

VIJAYABEN RAMBHAI VAJA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and I.T.A Nos. 281 to 284/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Smt. Vijayaben Rambhai Vaja Vs. ITO Penalties

VIJAYABEN RAMBHAI VAJA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

reassessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and I.T.A Nos. 281 to 284/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Smt. Vijayaben Rambhai Vaja Vs. ITO Penalties

M/S. GREEN EARTH BIOGAS PVT. LTD.,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

penalty would\nhave positive revenue impact as per the provisions of Section 270A(10b) of the\nAct, which states that where the total income determined under clause (a) of\nsub-section (1) of section or assessed, reassessed

BHARAT NATHABHAI BARAD,VERAVAL, GIR SOMNATH vs. ITO WARD-4, VERAVAL

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.411/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Bharat Nathabhai Barad Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Prop. Of M/S. Vinesh Enterprise, Ward-4, Village: Savani, Tal.: Veraval, Veraval. Veraval - Kodinar Highway, Dist.: Gir Somnath-362 268. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Avjpb6301K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order. Accordingly, I had appointed the said firm of chartered OLL-accountants as authorized representative and appeal was e-filed through them. 6. However, in the month of January, 2023, I suddenly informed that the penalty

SHRI HARESHBHAI J. FALDU,JUNAGADH vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE JUNAGADH, JUNAGADH

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 219/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 वष"

Penalty is made out. i) The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in K K Motwani HUF Vs AC1T (2016) In 2016- TIOL-2910-HC- MUM-IT held that, direction of 'non inclusion of amount chargeable to tax' during reassessment

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)

penalties once the assessment order itself has been quashed by us. In this regard, we rely on the legal maxim "Sublato fundamento cadit opus" (meaning thereby that foundation being removed, structure/work falls). Hence the initial action of the assessing officer in framing the reassessment

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)

penalties once the assessment order itself has been quashed by us. In this regard, we rely on the legal maxim "Sublato fundamento cadit opus" (meaning thereby that foundation being removed, structure/work falls). Hence the initial action of the assessing officer in framing the reassessment

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)

penalties once the assessment order itself has been quashed by us. In this regard, we rely on the legal maxim "Sublato fundamento cadit opus" (meaning thereby that foundation being removed, structure/work falls). Hence the initial action of the assessing officer in framing the reassessment

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)

penalties once the assessment order itself has been quashed by us. In this regard, we rely on the legal maxim "Sublato fundamento cadit opus" (meaning thereby that foundation being removed, structure/work falls). Hence the initial action of the assessing officer in framing the reassessment