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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

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

25,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Act, on account of unexplained expenditure. (b) For assessment year (AY) 2014-15, the assessing officer made an addition to tune of Rs.5,99,06,750/- on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and on account of profit chargeable to tax as per section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

reassessment proceedings may be quashed.\n12. On merit, the assessee submitted before the assessing officer that sale of\nunits made to the members of Sonwani Family is at the value, which is far higher\n(almost 1.50 to 2 times) than the valuation prescribed by State Government for\nlevy of stamp duty, that is, Jantri Value / Circle Rate

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

Section 151A of the Act. This scheme mandates that reassessment notices be issued through automated allocation and in a faceless manner, thereby eliminating direct interaction between the taxpayer and the tax authorities. The court interpreted this to mean that the authority to issue Page 9 of 25

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

Section 151A of the Act. This scheme mandates that reassessment notices be issued through automated allocation and in a faceless manner, thereby eliminating direct interaction between the taxpayer and the tax authorities. The court interpreted this to mean that the authority to issue Page 9 of 25

THE ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI VICKY BALKRISHNA MEHTA, RAJKOT

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Income-Tax, 7Th Floor, Mansrovar Central Circle-2, Apartment, Royal Park, Rajkot Kalawad Road, Rajkot Pan : Agqpm 6495 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 22.01.2020 Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2004-05. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:

section 149 is with effect from 01- 07-2012 and its not retrospective in nature. Thus the time limit which has already in expired could not have been revived by subsequent amendment. For all these reasons and complying the ratio laid down above cited cases, we hold that notice issued u/s. 148 on 25-03-2013 for both the above

JIGAR INDUSTRIES,JAMWADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAJKOT

In the result, the assessee`s appeal is allowed

reassessment proceeding,\nunder section 147/148, of the Act, initiated, merely on the basis of show- cause\nnotice, of the excise department. The detained findings of the Hon'ble\njurisdictional High Court of Gujarat, in the case of Ganga Glazed Tiles Pvt,\nLtd(supra), are as follows:\n“4. We also take notice of the fact that one Vrundavan Ceramics

GOPAL SNACKS PVT LTD ,RAJKOT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita Nos. 498 & 499/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2020-21 बनाम Gopal Snacks Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of Plot No.2322-2324, Gidc Metoda, Income Tax Vs. Lodhika, Rajkot, Gujarat-360021 Circle-1(1), Rajkot Pan : Aadcg6113A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala & Shri K. K. Maloo, Ars. राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit.Dr & Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08/12/2025

25 9. From the above approval document, under section 151 of the Income Tax Act 1961, it is vivid that there is no signature of the concerned authority, therefore, in the absence of signature by the concerned Authority, the above approval document, cannot be enforced in the eye of law. In order to create a legal document, the first