VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD,SURAT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.,-1(2), SURAT

In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं/It(Ss)A Nos.23 & 24/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 3, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Acit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Circle -1(2), Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 2, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं It(Ss)A Nos.90/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Dcit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Central Circle – 3, Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat. Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 21. The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Assessee`s appeal, in IT(SS)A No.90/SRT/2022, for AY.2014-15, are reproduced below for ready reference as follows: “(i) Ground nos. 1 and 2: On the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as law, on the subject, the issuance

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

SUNILKUMAR ICHHUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT

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

sections": ["144", "139(1)", "142(1)", "133(6)", "69A", "250"], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned

SHRI MAJID AJIT SHAIKH,SILVASSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA WARD, SILVASSA

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

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

6] of the Act.” 2. On perusal of record, shows that NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order on 23.09.2022, however, present appeal was filed on 03.01.2023, thus, there is delay of forty-two days in filing appeal before Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by affidavit of assessee. The Ld. Authorized

MANGHARAM MOOLCHAND VERMA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(3), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.765/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Mangharam Moolchand Verma Vs. Ito, 703, Smita Park, Sarela Wadi, Ward - 1(3)(3), Ghod Dod Road, Surat – 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abcpv1629D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayashree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/08/2025

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that delay in filing appeal was caused owing to the fact that order of CIT(A) was served on the email ID of previous tax consultant of the assessee, who inadvertently forgot

SHRI RAJU MAGANLAL PATEL,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INT. TAXATION, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Raju Maganlal Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Auspp 1436 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Tara Raju Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Avdpp 6714 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

133(6) of the Act about such cash deposit. As no response was made by assessee, the Assessing officer made addition of Rs. 10,50,500/- while passing assessment order dated 24/12/2018 under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

TARA RAJU PATEL,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, , SURAT

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Raju Maganlal Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Auspp 1436 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Tara Raju Patel, I.T.O. C/O-Dinkarbhai T. Patel, Shankar (International Taxation), Vs. Talao, Via-Dungri, Valsad. Surat. Pan No. Avdpp 6714 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

133(6) of the Act about such cash deposit. As no response was made by assessee, the Assessing officer made addition of Rs. 10,50,500/- while passing assessment order dated 24/12/2018 under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

BASANTILAL TARBA,RAJASTHAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-3(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, the ground of appeal raised in this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.512/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Bansntilal Tarba Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), बनाम/ 429/1023, Sundarnagar, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Vs. Ahimsa Circle, Bhilwara, Surat-395 001 Rajasthan- 311 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afipt 1037 P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ca राज" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing 23/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act’) dated 24.01.2024 by the National Face Less Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2010-11, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s. 144 r.w.s

JUNAID SULEMAN MOTARA,NA vs. ARIVS.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, , NAVSARI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay in filing the appeals, acknowledging the bona fide reasons provided by the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and remanded the matters back to the AO for fresh adjudication, directing that the assessee be given an opportunity of hearing.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "253(1)", "254(1)", "133(6

SURESHBHAI SUKHABHAI MISTRY ,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD 5, NAVASARI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.263/Srt/2022 (Ay 2011-12) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Sureshbhai Sukhabhai Mistry Income Tax Officer, 130, Kumbhar Faliya, Via Ward-5, Navsari Vs Satem, Tal: Navsari, Dist. Navsari-396466 Pan No: Ammpm 4411 H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sujesh C Suratwala, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 30.01.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 31.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 05.05.2022 For Assessment Year 2011-12, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 13.09.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Suresshbhai S Mistry “1. The Learned Ao As Well As Learned Nfac/Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Addition To The Total Income Of The Assessee Which Is Primarily Agriculture Inn Nature & In Fact Exempted To Tax

133(6) on 28.07.2017 to the bankers of the assessee. It was informed by the banker of assessee that there is cash deposited of Rs.15,90,670/- on various dates. As no response was made on the part of assessee against various notices, the Assessing Officer finally issued show cause notice dated 18.08.2017. The contents of such show cause notice

GHANSHYAM MANUBHAI RADADIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2016-17

delay of 302 days is condoned. Besides, the assessee at this juncture, submitted that certain documents were provided to the CIT(A) but the same was not taken into account. The unsecured loan taken from the parties has responded to section 133(6

RASIKLAL BAVCHANDBHAI AKBARI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(4), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Rasiklal Bavchandbhai Akbari, I.T.O., 307, Santkrupa Apartment, Ward-3(3)(4), Vs. Matru Shakti Road, Kapodara Surat. Char Rasta, Surat, Gujarat- 395006. Pan No. Agmpa 6060 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

delay of 14 days in filing the present is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that a very limited issue is raised in the present appeal with regard to confirming the addition of Rs. 5.00 lacs on account of mismatch in statement of Form 26AS

GAURAVKUMAR MANILAL PATEL,TAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2)(7), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

condoned the delay. The findings of the CIT(A) is at para 15 of the\norder. He found that assessee is distributor of mobile recharge of Uninor\nCompany under the trade name of ‘Keshari Nandan Enterprises' and he\nreceived commission income. He has not filed return u/s 139 or 148 of the Act\nfor AY.2012-13. The CIT(A) observed that

SANTOSH SINGH HUKAM SINGH KARNAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

133(6) of the Act and that the parties had confirmed the transactions. The assessee also argued that Santosh Singh Hukam Singh Karnawat (Individual) vs. ITO Asst. Year – 2012-13 - 3– the statement of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain had been retracted. The CIT(A), however, held that the assessee failed to produce the suppliers or provide current addresses for verification

JUNAID SULEMAN MOTARA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT OSD, WARD THEREE NAVSARI

133(6) of the\nAct to Talati cum Mantri to the village of Alipore, Ognisa and Khund calling for the\nland owned by the appellant on which survey was made by the Inspector. However,\nin actual appellant holding more land than inspector has verified and talati has\nmentioned, the learned AO has only rely on the document submitted

M/S. MEGA AIMS,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.722 To 723/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Mega Aims, Bharuch. B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.750 To 751/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) M/S. Mega Aims, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Bharuch. Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Appellant By Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2023

6. The appeals filed by the assessee, in ITA Nos. 750/SRT/2018 and 751/SRT/2018, for assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 and 2014-15 are barred by limitation by 2 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay for both assessment years. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH vs. M/S. MEGA AIMS, BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.722 To 723/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Mega Aims, Bharuch. B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.750 To 751/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) M/S. Mega Aims, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Bharuch. Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Appellant By Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2023

6. The appeals filed by the assessee, in ITA Nos. 750/SRT/2018 and 751/SRT/2018, for assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 and 2014-15 are barred by limitation by 2 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay for both assessment years. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH vs. M/S. MEGA AIMS, BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.722 To 723/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Mega Aims, Bharuch. B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.750 To 751/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) M/S. Mega Aims, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Bharuch. Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Appellant By Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2023

6. The appeals filed by the assessee, in ITA Nos. 750/SRT/2018 and 751/SRT/2018, for assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 and 2014-15 are barred by limitation by 2 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay for both assessment years. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard

M/S. MEGA AIMS,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHARUCH

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.722 To 723/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Mega Aims, Bharuch. B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.750 To 751/Srt/2018 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) M/S. Mega Aims, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, B-1, Gokuldham Complex, Dahej By – Bharuch. Pass Road, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqfm1615F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit(Dr) Appellant By Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2023

6. The appeals filed by the assessee, in ITA Nos. 750/SRT/2018 and 751/SRT/2018, for assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 and 2014-15 are barred by limitation by 2 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay for both assessment years. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard