RAJ KISHORE PRASAD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3,, VALSAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri O. P. Meena, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1689/Ahd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ Raj Kishore Prasad Ito, Ward-3 F-8, Ayodhyanagar Soc., Valsad. Vs. Opp. Sahjivan Soc., Shantinagar, Usmanpura, Ahmedabad-380013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aitpp0535A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Divyang Shah Revenue By: Shri Mayank Pandey (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/10/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 15.02.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-, Valsad [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - 2. “1 On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred In Adding Leave Travel Concession Of Rs.2,10,518/- By Not Allowing Exemption Under Section 10(5) Of The Act. 2. On Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Assessing Officer Has Also Erred In Not Allowing The Tds Credit Deposited

section 10(5) of the Act. 2. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. Assessing Officer has also erred in not allowing the TDS credit deposited ITA. No.1689/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 by Employer-State Bank of India on payment of leave travel concession of Rs.2,10,518/- which is subject matter of addition

RAVINDRANTH J. MISHRA,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -7, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

234C ought to be deleted and interest u/s 234B ought to be corrected as return u/s 148 was not filed because of unawareness. 2 Ravindranath J. Mishra v) That the demand be stayed till the disposal of order by your honours. vi) Any other relief your honours may deem fit. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter

SUNIL KUMAR MEHTA,DARIAPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 2(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the manner indicated above

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.265/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sunik Kumar Mehta बनाम/ Ito, A – 24, Asthvinayak Complex, Vs. Ward- 2(2)(1), Dariapur, Ahmedabad - 380004 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Allpm1108P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Chirag Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 28.01.2025 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [in short, “CIT(A)”] for assessment year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The assessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of Income

NARESHBHAI VIJAYBHAI GAMIT,TAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BARDOLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Nareshbhai Vijaybhai Gamit, I.T.O., Shop No. 37, Riddhi Siddhi Palace, Ward-1, Vs. Old Bus Stand, Vyara, Bardoli. District- Tapi-394650. Pan No. Bqbpg 4350 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 26/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal