DIVYABEN PRAFULCHANDRA PARMAR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.73/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Divyaben Prafulchand Parmar, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(3)(1), 1-2, Harikrishna Niwas, B/H Braham Surat. Kumari Ashram, Bhatar Road, Surat – 395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acbpp9559Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 9. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that assessee before us is an Individual and filed her return of income on 04.03.2015, declaring total income of Rs.4,22,502/-. The assessee`s case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notice

SHRI PARESH K. SORATHIYA,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(2)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.342/Srt/2018 (Ay 2009-10) (Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Paresh Sorathiya Income Tax Officer 195, Ambica Nagar No.2, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Vs Opp. Arogya Kendra, Gate, Surat-395001 Katargam Road, Surat Pan : Axbps 9579 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

delay of 920 days in filing the appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits. Now, we will advert to discuss the merit of the appeal. 7. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for Ay 2009-10, declaring income of Rs. 1,58,000/-. The case

OM SAI STONE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(1)(4), SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

condonation of delay. The main contention of ld. AR of assessee is that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate therefore, they have not checked their e-mail and that as soon as they checked the e-mail, realised that the order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A) and that immediately filed appeal before the Tribunal. The Director

OM SAI STONE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(4), SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

condonation of delay. The main contention of ld. AR of assessee is that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate therefore, they have not checked their e-mail and that as soon as they checked the e-mail, realised that the order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A) and that immediately filed appeal before the Tribunal. The Director

DIPAK CHANDRAKANTBHAI UGHADPAGA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of cost as directed hereinabove

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Dipak Chandrakantbhai Ito Ward 1(3)(6), Ughadpaga, Room No. 303, 3Rd Floor, Income 23, Premji Nagar, Adajan Road, Vs. Tax Office, Anavil Business Opp. Shital Studio, Nr. Gujarat Centre, Adajan, Gas Circle, Surat-395007. Surat-395009. Pan No. Aaypu 8592 K Appellant Respondent

125 days in the filing of the present appeal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor mala fide but occurred for bona fide and explainable reasons. He drew our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee explaining the cause of delay, wherein it has been stated that though

JAYSHRI GOPALLAL MAHARAJSHRINI SURAT SRUSTI TRUST,SURAT vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section 11 and had also explained reason for delay in filing Form No. 10B due to illness of Accountant who was on leave for long time, matter was to be remanded to respondent to condone delay in filing Form 10B. 8. In the case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. Income Tax Officer. (Exemption) [2021] 125

SHREE SUIGAM KHODADHOR PANJARA POLE,SURAT vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

condone delay in filing Form 10B. Shree Suigam Khodadhor Panjara Pole vs. ITO(E) Asst. Year –2019-20 - 5– 10. In the case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust vs. Income Tax Officer. (Exemption) [2021] 125 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat)/[2021] 278 Taxman 148 (Gujarat)[09-12-2020], the High Court held that where assessee, a public charitable trust registered under section

S M K R VASHI HIGH SCHOOL,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.515/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Physical Court Hearing) S.M.K.R Vashi High School Income Tax Officer-Exemption Ward, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Umbhrat Road Maroli Bazar, Vs. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jalalpore Navsari-396436 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs 0980 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

condoned, especially when the assessee filed the Form No.10B during the assessment proceedings, for this reliance can be placed on the judgment of Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Puna in the case of Kokan Kala Shikshan Vikaas Sanstha, in ITA No. 645/PUN/2021, order dated 30/12/2022, wherein it was held as follows: “4. We have heard the rival contentions of both

KATARGAM INDUSTRIAL ESTATE SHEDHOLDERS,SURAT vs. CIT(E), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is also allowed for statistical\npurposes

125, Dairy Faliya, Bhestan,\nSurat\n395023\nस्थायी लेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAWTS0970P\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nITA Nos.698/SRT/2025 (AY: 2025-26)\nVs.\nThe CIT (Exemption),\nKatargam Industrial Estate\nShedholders Associations,\nAhmedabad\nShed No.939, Road No.22, G.I.D.C\nKatargam, Surat - 395004\nस्थायी लेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAATK2511Q\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी /Respondent)\nAppellant by\nShri P. M. Jagasheth

SHRI KAMALUDDIN POPATLAL SURANI,VAPI vs. PCIT, VALSAD

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.666/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Kamaluddin Popatlal Surani, Vs. The Pcit, A/12, Golden Park, Kabrastan Road, Valsad Vapi - 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajyps2442M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh Upadhyaya, Ar Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 02/01/2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed his return of income for AY.2017-18 on 31.07.2018, declaring total income at Rs.3,45,749/-. The appellant was carrying on retail business of onion and potatoes under the name and style of M/s Altaf Traders. The case was re-opened

VIPULBHAI LABHUBHAI SUTARIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(4), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 41/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Vipulbhai Labhubhai Sutariya, Vs. The Cit(A)-1, Surat. A-68, Shanti Niketan Society, Nr. Dharam Jivan Row House, Mota Varachha, Surat-395006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Chops 2930 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ar Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/05/2022 23/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

condone the delay and admit the assessee`s appeal for adjudication on merit. 6. Succinct facts are that assessee had filed Income Tax Return showing income Rs.1,54,540/-. The assessing officer gathered information that bank account of assessee showed transactions totaling to Rs.1,62,10,799/- which 41/SRT/2020/AY.2011-12 Vipulbhai Labhubhai Sutariay were not disclosed by the assessee. Hence, assessing

SHREE SIDDHIVINAYK CHARITABLE TRUST JIYAV,SURAT vs. CIT(E), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

125, Dairy Faliya, Bhestan, Surat - 395023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAWTS0970P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) ITA Nos.698/SRT/2025 (AY: 2025-26) Katargam Industrial Estate Vs. The CIT (Exemption), Shedholders Associations, Ahmedabad Shed No.939, Road No.22, G.I.D.C Katargam, Surat - 395004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAATK2511Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant by Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain

DINABEN DILIPKUMAR PATEL,NA vs. ASRIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, ground related to the credit entry of Rs

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

condoned and the appeal was admitted for adjudication on merit. 4. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submissions before the ld. CIT(A). The submission of assesse is recorded in para four of order of ld. CIT(A). The assessee in her submission submitted that the assessee is 77 years old, Non-resident senior citizen, residing

DINABEN DILIPKUMAR PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

In the result, ground related to the credit entry of Rs

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

condoned and the appeal was admitted for adjudication on merit. 4. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submissions before the ld. CIT(A). The submission of assesse is recorded in para four of order of ld. CIT(A). The assessee in her submission submitted that the assessee is 77 years old, Non-resident senior citizen, residing

KAMUBEN RAMANLAL PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

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

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Raghunath Kamble& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.913/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (Hybrid Hearing) Smt. Kamuben Ramanlal Patel Income Tax Officer, Daman, बनाम/ House No.1, Varkund, Income Tax Department, Jeevanji Vs. Mithanagar, Nani Daman, Hotel Building, Kathiria Road, Daman & Diu-396 210 Nani Daman, Daman & Diu- -396210 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acppk1885N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे/Appellant By Shri Hemant Suthar, Ca राज"कीओरसे /Respondent By Shriajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 12.06.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 in levying 100% penalty of Rs.52,46,160/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by Assessing Officer on 11.01.2021. Grounds

ACIT, CC-3, SURAT vs. SHRI NARESH NEMCHAND SHAH, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.197/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Acit, Central Cir.-3, Vs. Naresh Nemchand Shah, Surat. Abhishek House, Bh. Jeevan Bharti School, Kadampali Society, Nanpura, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acrps 0182 J (Assessee)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee)

condone the delay in filing in some of the present appeals. The argument on behalf of the assessee was that on account of not filing the appeals by the revenue within the period of limitation, their vested right to avail the benefit of the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme was taken away. We have rejected such an argument firstly by holding