SHRI RAJESHKUMAR MAHESHBHAI MANEK,ANJAR KUTCH vs. THE ITO WARD-2, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, additional legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act. The facts relating to reopening the assessment under section 147/148 were there before the assessing officer.We note that it is purely a legal issue and all facts are already on record which goes to the root of the matter and no further inquiry is required for deciding the same, as all facts

SHRI PARESHKUMAR NARSHIBHAI SIROYA,DHORAJI, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

reassessment stage, there is no question\nof having taken one view of the matter or taking two different views by the assessing officer\nor by the CIT.\n(iii)The Hon'ble ITAT, Cochin in the case of Shri Narayana Dharam Paripalana\nYuvadhana Samiti vs. ITO, Exemption (2019) 111 taxmnan.com 416 has held that where\nthe assessing officer has taken

M/S. SHREE SIDHNATH ENTERPRISE,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.172/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2006-2007 A.C.I.T, M/S Shree Sidhnath Enterprise, Central Circle-1, Vs. 8, Chokhawala Chambers, Rajkot. Bardan Gali, Danapith, Rajkot.

reassessments were subsequently dropped by the A.O. following the above mentioned Gujarat High Court judgment Page 128 to 133 6. It is completely illogical to assume that every bank receipt should constitute income of the assessee. The reopening on such a fallacious assumption is not permissible in law. Delhi ITAT in case of Bir Bahadur Singh Siwali

HETALKUMAR PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU,RAJKOT vs. PR. CIT, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

sections": [ "69A", "115BBE", "263", "143(3)", "142(1)", "69B", "69C", "43B", "133(6)" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment order passed by the PCIT

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

LUNAR CERAMICS,WANKANER vs. PCIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

133(6) dated 23.01.2023 was\nissued to Haresh Sojitra calling for details of transactions entered into with the\nassessee. However, no response received by the Haresh Sojitra. The assessee\nstated that no transaction with the Haresh Sojitra during the assessment year, an\naffidavit was filed in support of this. After considering the assessment order\ncompleted on returned income

RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD,RAJKOT vs. THE PCIT, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment every year. As one reaches close to the end of the warranty period, the probability that the warranty expenses will be incurred is considerably reduced and that should be reflected in the estimation amount. Whether this should be done through a pro rata reversal or otherwise would require assessment of historical trend. If warranty provisions are based on experience

M/S RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment every year. As one reaches close to the end of the warranty period, the probability that the warranty expenses will be incurred is considerably reduced and that should be reflected in the estimation amount. Whether this should be done through a pro rata reversal or otherwise would require assessment of historical trend. If warranty provisions are based on experience

THE DEPUTY COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, RAJKOT vs. M/S RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment every year. As one reaches close to the end of the warranty period, the probability that the warranty expenses will be incurred is considerably reduced and that should be reflected in the estimation amount. Whether this should be done through a pro rata reversal or otherwise would require assessment of historical trend. If warranty provisions are based on experience

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPEMENT PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassessment every year. As one reaches close to the end of the warranty period, the probability that the warranty expenses will be incurred is considerably reduced and that should be reflected in the estimation amount. Whether this should be done through a pro rata reversal or otherwise would require assessment of historical trend. If warranty provisions are based on experience

SHRI DHIRAJLAL BHANJIBHAI VADALIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dhirajlal Bhanjibhai Vadalia Cit-1, 1St Floor, Sterling Appts., Vs Rajkot. Jawahar Road, Rajkot.

reassess allow/ability of deductions u/s. 54F and 54B of the Act. 4. On merits, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot - I, Rajkot erred in holding that the appellant did not satisfy conditions for allowability of deductions u/s. 54F and 54B of the Act.” 6.1 The ld.AR for the assessee, Shri Deepak Rindani, submitted that detailed inquiry on all aspects

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2) (5), , RAJKOT vs. SHRI DHIRAJLAL BHANJIBHAI VADALIA, RAJKOT

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dhirajlal Bhanjibhai Vadalia Cit-1, 1St Floor, Sterling Appts., Vs Rajkot. Jawahar Road, Rajkot.

reassess allow/ability of deductions u/s. 54F and 54B of the Act. 4. On merits, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot - I, Rajkot erred in holding that the appellant did not satisfy conditions for allowability of deductions u/s. 54F and 54B of the Act.” 6.1 The ld.AR for the assessee, Shri Deepak Rindani, submitted that detailed inquiry on all aspects

AJAYKUMAR NATWARLAL SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2) RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

reassessment proceedings, I have produced all the\ninformation, details, data and materials such as books of accounts, expenses bills and\nvouchers and copy of each contract notes and bills and ledger account of F&O trading\nactivities are also placed on records which you have verified. As you have not called\nfor the details from my registered broker u/s 133

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT vs. SHRI NILESH NATWARLAL SHETH, , RAJKOT

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 38/Rjt/2018 With C.O No.16/Rjt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 D.C.I.T., Shri Nilesh Natwarlal Sheth, Central Circle-2, Vs. Prop. Of M/S.Kruna Finvest, Rajkot. 403-Star Chambers, Harihar Chowk, Rajkot.

133(6) dated 22/11/2016 to the broker of the appellant wherein broker has furnished details being transactions executed with the appellant along with evidence, bank statement and copy of return of income vide letter dated 30/11/2016. Even broker vide letter dated 13/12/2016 has stated that appellant has not requested for client code modification during the year under consideration and even

JAY PRABHUDAS VITHALANI,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the same assessee (ITA No

133(6) of the Act was issued to the parties with the prior approval\nfrom the authority and in reply the AO and relied \"Copy of Income tax Return,\ncopy of ledger account with your concern, copy of bank statement reflecting and\nhighlighting the entry of the transaction with assessee's concern, Copy of GST\nReturn.\"\nAll the above submissions

LATE CHHOTALAL VALLABHADAS DOSHI L/H. HEIR SMT. PRABHAVATIBEN CHHOTALAL DOSHI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO WARD-1(3), JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.698/Rjt/ 2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) Late Chhotalal Vallabhdas Doshi Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Jamnagar. (Legal Heir Smt. Prabhavatiben Chhotalal Doshi). 505 Ajitnath Apartment, Near Indraprasth Tower, Jamnagar. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdpd9371Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld. Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing :23/12/2024 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement :22/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [(In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 24/07/204, Which In Turn Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer Vide Order Dated 22/03/2016 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: 1. Hon. Cit(A) Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal By Contending That No Response Has Been Received From Assessee Although The Response Has Been Submitted Through Samadhan.Faceless.Appeal@Incometax.Gov.In As There Was No Income Tax Registration Due To Death Of The Assessee I.E. Chhotalal Doshi On Ita-698/Rjt/2024 (Ay-2008-09) Late Chhotalal Doshi Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Jamnagar.

section 151 of the IT Act in mechanical manner and therefore, notice issued u/s 148 is invalid and reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming reopening of assessment. 6. Learned A.O. erred in law as well as on facts in making addition of total of credits appearing in bank accounts amounting

M/S. GANGA GLAZED TILES PVT. LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-I,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 143(3) of the act was also initiated in the following cases: - Ganga Glazed Ties – AY 08-09 - Ganga Glazed Ties P.L. – AY 08-09 - Gangotri Glazed Tiles – AY 08-09 - Gokul Cera Pvt. Ltd. – AY 08-09 - Vrundavan Cera P. Ltd. – AY 08-09 - Varmora Grantio P. Ltd. – AY 08-09 - Italica Tiles

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