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.

40 results for “capital gains”+ Section 184(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi290Mumbai251Bangalore172Karnataka115Jaipur104Ahmedabad73Hyderabad71Chandigarh62Kolkata46Chennai43Raipur42Surat40Indore24Pune21Amritsar20Calcutta17Lucknow14SC6Cuttack6Varanasi6Guwahati6Telangana5Agra4Cochin4Rajasthan4Visakhapatnam4Rajkot3Panaji1Jabalpur1Dehradun1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 234E76Section 200A29Addition to Income25Section 14724Section 143(3)21Section 271(1)(c)17Penalty15Section 254(1)14TDS13Limitation/Time-bar

THE ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, SURAT vs. MICRO INKS LIMITED,, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2375/AHD/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2375/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, V Micro Inks Limited, (International Taxation), Surat. S. Bilakhia House, Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2707/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Micro Inks Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, Bilakhia House, Muktanand S. (International Taxation), Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. Surat. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Gopala Krishnan – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 14.02.2020

Section 201Section 5Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vb)

184 Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Total Rs.3,76,67,052 4. And accordingly, after serving statutory notices and seeking reply of the assessee order u/s.201 and 201(1A) r.w.195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed by the ld.Assessing Officer (AO) thereby making addition. 5. Being aggrieved with the order of the ld.AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

13
Condonation of Delay13
Section 14811

MICRO INKS PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS MICRO INKS LTD.),VAPI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ( INTL. TAXN.), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2707/AHD/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2375/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, V Micro Inks Limited, (International Taxation), Surat. S. Bilakhia House, Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2707/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Micro Inks Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, Bilakhia House, Muktanand S. (International Taxation), Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. Surat. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Gopala Krishnan – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 14.02.2020

Section 201Section 5Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)Section 9(1)(vb)

184 Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Total Rs.3,76,67,052 4. And accordingly, after serving statutory notices and seeking reply of the assessee order u/s.201 and 201(1A) r.w.195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed by the ld.Assessing Officer (AO) thereby making addition. 5. Being aggrieved with the order of the ld.AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before

DAMODAR JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD.2(2)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 183/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

section 69C on account of commission paid @ 2% or 3% of bogus long term capital gain. In the assessee`s case AO added Rs. 10426 ( 3% of Rs.3,47,564). Since, we have deleted the alleged addition of Rs.3,47,564/-, hence addition made by AO does not have leg to stand, therefore it is hereby deleted. 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12

DAMODAR JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD.2(2)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 184/SRT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

section 69C on account of commission paid @ 2% or 3% of bogus long term capital gain. In the assessee`s case AO added Rs. 10426 ( 3% of Rs.3,47,564). Since, we have deleted the alleged addition of Rs.3,47,564/-, hence addition made by AO does not have leg to stand, therefore it is hereby deleted. 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12

JASODADEVI RAJARAM JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WD.-2(2)(2), SURAT

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

ITA 185/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

section 69C on account of commission paid @ 2% or 3% of bogus long term capital gain. In the assessee`s case AO added Rs. 10426 ( 3% of Rs.3,47,564). Since, we have deleted the alleged addition of Rs.3,47,564/-, hence addition made by AO does not have leg to stand, therefore it is hereby deleted. 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12

BHAVANABEN PRAVINCHANDRABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms indicated above

ITA 71/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.71/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Bhavnaben Pravinchandrabhai Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ Patel Ward-1(3)(6), Surat, 303, Vs. 16D/183/6 Shiv Shaki Bhavan, Income Tax Office, Anavil Opp. Rupli Chinema, Ram Business Centre, Adajan, Surat- Nagar, Rander Road, Surat-395 395 007 005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bgfpp 0968 N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

gain at Rs.7,79,184/- ignoring the fact that appellant land was rural agricultural land as such, it is not capital asset subject to Income tax. 2. Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on fact to confirm AO’s addition on account of LTCG that worked out by the AO by taking 50C value and that

SHRI DAHYABHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 186/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI PARSOTTAMBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 190/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI RAJESHBHAI NARSINHBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 187/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI KANTIBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 191/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

MAHESHBHAI PRABHUBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1() (2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 263/SRT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SMT. VALIBEN NARSHIBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 188/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI KANTIBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 192/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI NATVARBHAI KANJIBHAI PATEL,HUF,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 184/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI KISHORBHAI GIJUBHAI,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 189/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI MANOJBHAI GIJUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 185/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI GIJUBHAI PRABHUBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 193/SRT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SHRI GIJUBHAI PRABHUBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 194/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Am (Virtual Court Hearing) Sl.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

capital gains only on account of cost of improvement on pucca structure was partly upheld on estimation basis. Therefore, all substantial additions were either deleted or upheld only on estimation basis. In our considered view no penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable on all the assessees. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised

SOMA TECH PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 344/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.344/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Soma Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Principal 301, Soham House, Commissioner Of Income Opp. St. Xavier’S School, Tax-2, Surat. Ghod Dod Road, Surat. [Pan: Aakcs 5265 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Hiren Vepari – Ca राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit-Dr

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

5. The reply furnished by the assessee was not accepted by the ld. PCIT. The Ld. PCIT took his view that share application money received form part of capital receipt and its subsequent return form part of capital expenditure. Any exchange rate differences arising out of such capital amount also form part of capital expenditure. Thus, the expenditure of Rs.15

HETALKUMAR CHANDRAKANTBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(7), SURAT

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

ITA 1340/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1340/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Hetalkumar Chandrakantbhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, A-371/3, Sundervan Raw House, Nr. Ward – 1(3)(7), Subhash Garden, Jahangirabad, Surat Bhesan, Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bkrpp5151R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025

Section 250Section 253(3)

184 days. The tax matter was dealt with by his earlier tax consultant, Shri Kishorbhai Patel. After completion of assessment proceedings, the order of CIT(A) was handed over to Chartered Accountant (CA), M/s Kansariwala & Chevli. Service of appeal order was neither in his knowledge nor his tax consultant. Later on, the appellant received penalty notice, dated 17.12.2024 in physical