SHRI GIRISHBHAI NANJIBHAI SOLANKI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2), RAJKOT

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed partly for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

139 of the Act as a return of income under section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 07-12-2016 and after providing final opportunity to the assessee framed the assessment vide order dated 30-12-2016 wherein certain additions were made to the total income of the assessee

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

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

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,93,16,000 97,30,528 4,95,85,472 Total 20,29,63,176 3,02,56,860/- 17,27,06,316/- 5.6 In view of the above decision, it is found that the undersigned had estimate GP of the assessee @ 8% in respect of unrecorded sales/receipt for A.Y.2013-14

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

5,00,000 metric tonne. Currently,\nNeelkanth Group as a whole consist of the following members:\nDescendants of Late Shri Spouse of first generation\nSadhabhai S. Kangad\nArjanbhai S. Kangad\nKhengarbhai S. Kangad\nTejabhai S. Kangad\nShamjibhai S. Kangad\nDevaiben A. Kangad\nJashumatiben T. Kangad\nRatanben S. Kangad\nSecond generation\nKhimji A. Kangad\nChandradeep K Kangad\nMihir T. Kangad\nHetab

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