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

11 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. M/s. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd. the said infrastructure facility was ignored while deciding the issue of deduction u/s 80IA(4)of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not taking into account the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court

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

11 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. M/s. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd. the said infrastructure facility was ignored while deciding the issue of deduction u/s 80IA(4)of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not taking into account the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

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

reassessment under Section 148 within the prescribed time limits. Further, Section 151 requires assessing officers to obtain sanction of the specified authority before issuing notice under Section 148. In Chhugamal Rajpal v. S P Chaliha, a three-Judge Bench of this Court held that Section 151 must be strictly adhered to because it contains "important safeguards." 65 Section 151 imposes

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

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

reassessment under Section 148 within the prescribed time limits. Further, Section 151 requires assessing officers to obtain sanction of the specified authority before issuing notice under Section 148. In Chhugamal Rajpal v. S P Chaliha, a three-Judge Bench of this Court held that Section 151 must be strictly adhered to because it contains "important safeguards." 65 Section 151 imposes

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for Assessment

4) of the Act. Accordingly, the assessee submitted that denial of deduction only because the assessee is subject to search is totally without ITA Nos. 218/Rjt/2015 & 204/Rjt/2015 (Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT) 7 & (ACIT vs. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y. 2008-09 jurisdiction. However, Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the challenge to jurisdiction with the following observations: “6. The decisions

M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LIMITED.,,AHMEDABAD 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

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts

M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LIMITED.,,AHMEDABAD 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

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts

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

reassess the income in respect of issues which have escaped assessment, if such issues come to his notice in the course of proceedings under this Section even though the said issues did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. 14.3 Now coming to the facts of the case before

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

reassess the income in respect of issues which have escaped assessment, if such issues come to his notice in the course of proceedings under this Section even though the said issues did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. 14.3 Now coming to the facts of the case before

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

reassess the income in respect of issues which have escaped assessment, if such issues come to his notice in the course of proceedings under this Section even though the said issues did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. 14.3 Now coming to the facts of the case before

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

reassess the income in respect of issues which have escaped assessment, if such issues come to his notice in the course of proceedings under this Section even though the said issues did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. 14.3 Now coming to the facts of the case before

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

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

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

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

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

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

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

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

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT vs. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD., RJAKOT

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

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

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales