BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

35 results for “bogus purchases”+ Section 251(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai441Delhi265Jaipur126Karnataka105Chandigarh59Ahmedabad52Bangalore40Surat35Kolkata33Chennai31Nagpur28Rajkot24Pune20Raipur18Lucknow15Hyderabad14Indore13Guwahati12Amritsar10Cuttack5Visakhapatnam3Allahabad3Jodhpur2Varanasi2Agra2Patna1Jabalpur1Cochin1

Key Topics

Addition to Income35Section 14731Section 143(3)30Section 14822Section 6819Survey u/s 133A12Disallowance9Business Income7Cash Deposit7

SHRI VIMALCHAND JAIN,,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(5),, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 293/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Mar 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

section 251(1) r.w.s. 251(2) of the Act. The total income of the appellant is assessed at Rs. 12,26,43,063/-In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the appellant has indulged in a elaborate scheme of taking accommodation entry of bogus purchases

ARVINDKUMAR SONI,SURAT vs. ITO, WD-2(3)(7), SURAT, SURAT

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

Demonetization7
Bogus/Accommodation Entry6
Section 69C5

In the result the ground No

ITA 165/SRT/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.460/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Arvind Soni, Surat. Prop. Of M/S. Balajee Diamond, B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Opp. Mathura Nagari, Palanpur Gam, Surat - 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.165/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) Arvindkumar Soni, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Surat. Opp. Mathura Nagari, Planpur Gam, Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection. No.14/Srt/2021 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 460/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Arvind Soni, Surat. Prop. Of M/S. Balajee Diamond, B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Opp. Mathura Nagari, Palanpur Gam, Surat - 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Prakash G. Jhunjhunwala, Ca With Assessee By Shri Anand R. Chourasia, Ca Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 01/07/2022 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

251/- during the F.Y. 2008-09, which is reported as bogus purchases/accommodation entries. The said transactions are included in the Profit & Loss account and are showing incorrect profit. Intimation has been received from the DGIT(INV), Ahmedabad, vide letter dated 08.03.2014 in respect of bogus bills of purchases taken by the assessee. It has come to light that the assessee

ITO, WARD-2(3)(7), SURAT vs. ARVIND SONI, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 460/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.460/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Arvind Soni, Surat. Prop. Of M/S. Balajee Diamond, B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Opp. Mathura Nagari, Palanpur Gam, Surat - 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.165/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) Arvindkumar Soni, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Surat. Opp. Mathura Nagari, Planpur Gam, Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection. No.14/Srt/2021 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 460/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Arvind Soni, Surat. Prop. Of M/S. Balajee Diamond, B-3, 701, Nakshara Platinum, Opp. Mathura Nagari, Palanpur Gam, Surat - 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfmps0796F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Prakash G. Jhunjhunwala, Ca With Assessee By Shri Anand R. Chourasia, Ca Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 01/07/2022 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

251/- during the F.Y. 2008-09, which is reported as bogus purchases/accommodation entries. The said transactions are included in the Profit & Loss account and are showing incorrect profit. Intimation has been received from the DGIT(INV), Ahmedabad, vide letter dated 08.03.2014 in respect of bogus bills of purchases taken by the assessee. It has come to light that the assessee

UMESHKUMAR P BANSAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 146/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

2. Though Ld. AO has not specified the section/provision of the IT Act, it is quite evident that he has invoked Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AO has termed the outstanding trade creditors as bogus liability in the form of creditors and given treatment of unexplained cash credits as per Section 68. On careful consideration of facts

ITO, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT vs. SHRI UMESH P BANSAL, SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 155/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

2. Though Ld. AO has not specified the section/provision of the IT Act, it is quite evident that he has invoked Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AO has termed the outstanding trade creditors as bogus liability in the form of creditors and given treatment of unexplained cash credits as per Section 68. On careful consideration of facts

UMESHKUMAR P BANSAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 145/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

2. Though Ld. AO has not specified the section/provision of the IT Act, it is quite evident that he has invoked Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AO has termed the outstanding trade creditors as bogus liability in the form of creditors and given treatment of unexplained cash credits as per Section 68. On careful consideration of facts

ITO, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT vs. SHRI UMESH P BANSAL, SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 154/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

2. Though Ld. AO has not specified the section/provision of the IT Act, it is quite evident that he has invoked Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AO has termed the outstanding trade creditors as bogus liability in the form of creditors and given treatment of unexplained cash credits as per Section 68. On careful consideration of facts

DIYA FABRICS,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, while appeal of the assessee is allowed, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 355/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Diya Fabrics, Vs. The Ito, 1418, Kohinoor Market, Ring Road, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat. Surat – 395002. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfd3658A

Section 40A(3)Section 68

purchases made from the said creditor has not been treated as bogus. We note that Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue on merit based on the evidences submitted by assessee and the material on record and therefore order passed by ld CIT(A) cannot be treated as an ex parte order, hence matter cannot be remitted back

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), SURAT vs. M/S. RAJLAXMI INFRA, SURAT

In the result, this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 163/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.163/Srt/2020 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Rajlaxmi Infra Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Room 64, Rajlaxmi Height, Vs No.410, Aayakar Bhawan, Singanpore Cosway Road, Majura Gate, Opp. Shradhhadeep Soc, Surat-395001 Surat-395004 Pan No. Aaofr 1095 C ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

2 Rajlaxmi Infra Rs.10.00 lakh and Manish B. Shah proprietor of Navkar Auto Glass of Rs.25.00 lakh respectively. In order to verify the genuineness of unsecured loan, Assessing Officer issued notice under section 133(6) of the Act to all four creditors (parties). The Assessing Officer recorded that no reply was received from such lenders. The assessee was asked

N.R. AGARWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VAPI vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 1302/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

bogus purchases. Similarly in CIT Vs Kashiram Textile Mills Pvt Ltd (supra), the Hon’ble High Court held that there was no material on record to conclude that in addition to the alleged fictitious purchases there were also some other purchases for the same material under 24 NR Aggarwal Industries Ltd. Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2013-14 different invoices

THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. N.R. AGARWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VAPI

In the result the ground No

ITA 1526/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 80I

bogus purchases. Similarly in CIT Vs Kashiram Textile Mills Pvt Ltd (supra), the Hon’ble High Court held that there was no material on record to conclude that in addition to the alleged fictitious purchases there were also some other purchases for the same material under 24 NR Aggarwal Industries Ltd. Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2013-14 different invoices

BSAS INFOTECH LIMITED,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT

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

ITA 225/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri P M Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

purchases. Various evidences found and seized from the premises of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and others proved the above facts. As per list available with this office, it is found that the assessee company has received accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loan amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- from the concern M/s. Vanguard Jewels Limited of Pravinkumar Jain Group

BSAS INFOTECH LIMITED,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 224/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri P M Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

purchases. Various evidences found and seized from the premises of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and others proved the above facts. As per list available with this office, it is found that the assessee company has received accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loan amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- from the concern M/s. Vanguard Jewels Limited of Pravinkumar Jain Group

BSAS INFORTECH LIMITED, SURAT,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT

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

ITA 226/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri P M Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

purchases. Various evidences found and seized from the premises of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and others proved the above facts. As per list available with this office, it is found that the assessee company has received accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loan amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- from the concern M/s. Vanguard Jewels Limited of Pravinkumar Jain Group

CHANDULAL A.SHAH(HUF),SURAT vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, Ind for A

ITA 83/SRT/2017[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं././././I.T.A Nos.83 & 84/Srt/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2004-05 1.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah (Huf), V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aaahc 8116 R] 2.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah, V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Adaps 5844 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148

251 totaling to Rs. 4,80,992 not shown in the balance sheet for the period under consideration, hence, same was treated as unexplained expenditure under section 69 of the Act. 27. In appeal, CIT (A) has confirmed the same. Chandulal A Shah (HUF) v. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1),Surat/ITA. 83 & 84/SRT/2017/A.Y.2000-01 & 2004-05 Page

BALDEVRAJ JAMMURAM AHUJA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 178/SRT/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.178/Srt/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) Baldevraj Jamnuram Ahuja, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(2)(1), Shop No.B/4073, Millenium Tex Surat. Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aazpa7998J (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Rushi Parekh, Ar Revenue By : Ms Anupama Singhla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 14/03/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/05/2022

For Appellant: Ms Rushi Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

purchase bills and also unsecured loan accommodation entries to various interested parties. As a result of the search and seizure action it was conclusively proved that these diamond concerns are only paper based with no real business activities. From the details and evidences made available on record, it was obseerved that Shri Praveen Kumar Jain has given the following accommodation

KAMAL JAYANTILAL ZAVERI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7), , SURAT

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 544/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.543 To 547/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 1215-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamal Jayantilal Zaveri Income Tax Officer, Ward B-104, Krishna Park Apartment, 1(3)(7) Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Nutan Row House, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Palanpur, Jakatnaka, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaapz 5662 K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Since the issue involved in all these appeals are common and identical except variance of amount, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as grounds of appeal

KAMAL JAYANTILAL ZAVERI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.543 To 547/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 1215-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamal Jayantilal Zaveri Income Tax Officer, Ward B-104, Krishna Park Apartment, 1(3)(7) Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Nutan Row House, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Palanpur, Jakatnaka, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaapz 5662 K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Since the issue involved in all these appeals are common and identical except variance of amount, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as grounds of appeal

KAMAL JAYANTILAL ZAVERI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 547/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.543 To 547/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 1215-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamal Jayantilal Zaveri Income Tax Officer, Ward B-104, Krishna Park Apartment, 1(3)(7) Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Nutan Row House, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Palanpur, Jakatnaka, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaapz 5662 K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Since the issue involved in all these appeals are common and identical except variance of amount, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as grounds of appeal

KAMAL JAYANTILAL ZAVERI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7), SURAT

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 545/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.543 To 547/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 1215-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamal Jayantilal Zaveri Income Tax Officer, Ward B-104, Krishna Park Apartment, 1(3)(7) Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Opp. Nutan Row House, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Palanpur, Jakatnaka, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaapz 5662 K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Since the issue involved in all these appeals are common and identical except variance of amount, therefore these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts as well as grounds of appeal