JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD-2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

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

reassessment notice 2) under section 148 has undergone a change by replacing the old procedure under sections 147 to 151 by new procedure under section 147 to 151 including the insertion provision of section 148A providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of GKN Driveshafts India

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

reassessment proceedings may be quash on this score only.\n23.The Ld.Counsel also took us through the paper book at page no.17, wherein\nnotice u/s.148 of the Act, issued by the assessing officer, dated 23.02.2023, is\nplaced, wherein it is stated as follows:\n“I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your\ncase

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

reassessment proceedings may be quash on this score only.\n23.The Ld.Counsel also took us through the paper book at page no.17, wherein\nnotice u/s.148 of the Act, issued by the assessing officer, dated 23.02.2023, is\nplaced, wherein it is stated as follows:\n“I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your\ncase

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

reassessment proceedings may be quash on this score only.\n23.The Ld.Counsel also took us through the paper book at page no.17, wherein\nnotice u/s.148 of the Act, issued by the assessing officer, dated 23.02.2023, is\nplaced, wherein it is stated as follows:\n“I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your\ncase

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 124(3)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in terms of which jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer cannot be called in question by on assessee after expiry of one month from date on which he was served with a notice for reopening assessment under section 148 of the I.T Act. 2. Thee learned CIT(A)-1 has erred

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

reassessment proceedings may be quash on this score only.\n23.The Ld.Counsel also took us through the paper book at page no.17, wherein\nnotice u/s.148 of the Act, issued by the assessing officer, dated 23.02.2023, is\nplaced, wherein it is stated as follows:\n“I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your\ncase

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

reassessment proceedings may be quash on this score only.\n23.The Ld.Counsel also took us through the paper book at page no.17, wherein\nnotice u/s.148 of the Act, issued by the assessing officer, dated 23.02.2023, is\nplaced, wherein it is stated as follows:\n“I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your\ncase

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 that since there is no change in the income declared and income assessed by the Assessing Officer, it cannot be said that there were any concealment of income. Relevant extract is reproduced as under: "We find that the income

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

125 to 150 crores in addition to the deposits of the directors, shareholders\nand relatives in the companies. A chart showing year-wise exposure of debt was\nsubmitted before the assessing officer. It was submitted that properties & assets\nmortgaged for taking finance from the bank are all accounted for in the books of\naccount of relevant group concern

SOBER CERAMICS,MORBI vs. ITO, WARD-4, MORBI, MORBI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings\nbeing ab-initio void. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that\nthe present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid order of the\nTribunal, a copy of which was also placed before the Bench. Thus,\nwe find that issue, of the assessee, under consideration, is squarely\ncovered by the judgment of jurisdictional ITAT Rajkot, in ITA No.\n42/Rjt/2023

SEABIRD MARINE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMNAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, JAMNAGAR, JAMANGAR

In the result, ground No.4 raised by the assessee is allowed

reassess the company's income,\nthen it would have stated so in section 115J that 'income of the company as accepted by the\nAssessing Officer'. In the absence of the same and on the language of section 115J, it will have\nto held that view taken by the Tribunal is correct and the High Court has erred in reversing

SHRI KANJIBHAI B. RANGANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In appeal, Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed addition with the following observations: “5.0 I have carefully considered the Penalty order of the AO, the written submissions of the appellant and the rival contentions. Though the appellant has preferred a total of 09 grounds, the core issue Kanjibhai Bhimjibhai Rangani vs. ITO Asst.Year

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2),, RAJKOT

section 124(3)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in terms\nof which jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer cannot be called in question by on\nassessee after expiry of one month from date on which he was served with a notice for\nreopening assessment under section 148 of the I.T Act.\n2. Thee learned CIT(A)-1 has erred

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT vs. BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,, RAJKOT

section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act and\nAssessing Officer made following addition:\n34\nH\nBHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA\nDHAMJIBHAI & KHIRAJMAL LEKHRAJBHAI THALVANI\ni.\nAddition an account of commission income of Rs. 8,61,446/-.\nii.\nAddition of peak credit in bank account of Rs. 46,50,353/-.\nOn appeal, before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not press ground

KUMAR RAMESH SAHU,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.336/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Kumar Ramesh Sahu बनाम/ The Acit, Sundaram, 72/3, New Cirtcle-2(3) Vs. College Wadi Rajkot – 60 001 150Ft5. Ring Road Opp. Meera Apartment Rajkot – 360 005 (Gujarat) "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aesps 5531 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 13/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha:

Section 147 of the of the Act. (iii) According to written statement, the reasons recorded on the basis of the information by some other officer could not satisfy the requirement in law. This is a case of only borrowed satisfaction, which is not at all permissible and therefore the power u/s 147 of the Act should not be exercised mechanically

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act and some of the\nassessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer under section 153A r.w.s.\n143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act').The main ground of appeal by\nthe department (Revenue) is pertaining to assailing and deletion of 70% of additions\nmade on account

SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(2)(4),, RAJKOT

125-130/RJT/2017 dated 11.11.2024, which are reproduced below:\n12. Before us, Ld.CIT-DR submitted written submission also, which are reproduced below:\n4.\n1. The appeals are categorized under 2 categories for ease of reference.\na. Category A – Search & Seizure related appeals (date of search 17.01.2013). and\nb. Category B – Reopening/ Review related assessment and subsequent appeals.\n(Please refer

SHREE BALAJI LUMBERS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHIDHAM vs. ACIT CIRCLE , GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 68 of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who has confirmed the action of the assessing officer. The ld. CIT(A) observed that assessing officer received credible information that assessee paid cash to the accommodation entry provider which was returned via bank credit