NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

delay condonation applications stand allowed. 37. It is declared that the writ-applicants are entitled to seek exemption under section 12 of the Act. The authorities below are directed to give effect to such exemption to the assessees and pass necessary consequential orders in this regard. However, as fairly submitted by Mr. Vora, the grant of benefit of exemption under

NAVBHARAT CHERITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHARUCH

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi Jhagadia, Bharuch, Ward-1, Vs. Gujarat, Pin-393115 Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

delay condonation applications stand allowed. 37. It is declared that the writ-applicants are entitled to seek exemption under section 12 of the Act. The authorities below are directed to give effect to such exemption to the assessees and pass necessary consequential orders in this regard. However, as fairly submitted by Mr. Vora, the grant of benefit of exemption under

SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , SURAT - 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.343/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Sachin Notified Area, Vs. The Pcit, Surat-1 Plot No.5719, Unnati Building, Sachin Gidc, Sachin, Surat-394230. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaals0146H Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Appellant By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 31/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/06/2023

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 4. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that assessee before us is deemed Municipality working in the name and style as ‘Sachin Notified Area’. The assessee had filed its return of income for assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18 on 24/03/2018, declaring total income NIL, after claiming deduction of Rs.13

SARITA SABHAJEET YADAV,SILVASSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEAL), NATIONAL FACELESS CENTRE

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 217/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Sarita Sabhajeet Yadav, Vs. The Cit(A), Nafc, Delhi. 202, Daisy-A, Type-C, Nano City, Samarvarni, Silvassa Dnh, Silvassa, Dadra & Nagar Haveli-396230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amkpy 0018 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Snehal Ambelal Modi, Ar Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2022

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 375 days in filling appeal before him and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel submits that assessee has explained the delay

SHRI MANSUKH K. VAGHASIA,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(3),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1070/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mansukh K. Vaghasia, Surat Vs. The Ito, Ward-8(3), C-1-102, Subham Residency, B/H Surat. Natvar Nagar, Nana Varachha, Surat-395008. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acjpv4517A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sita Ram Meena, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/04/2022

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 7. Brief facts of the issue in dispute are stated as under. Before us, assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 15.03.2011, declaring total income of Rs.1,54,310/- and the same was processed by the Income Tax Department accepting the returned income. 8. Later

KESHRI EXPORT,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3)(3), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.186/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Virtual Hearing) Keshri Export, Vs. The Ito, 123, Gurunagar Society, Opp. Baroda Ward-3(3)(1), Prestige, Varachha Road, Surat. Surat – 395006. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfk3785D Assessee By Shri Hiren Vepari, Ca Respondent By Shri Milan Kamble, Sr. Dr 18/07/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 11/09/2023

Section 5 of Limitation Act, should receive a liberal construction when the, delay is not on account of any dilatory tactics, want of bona fides, deliberate inaction or negligence on the part of the applicant/assessee, in order to advance substantial justice. The words "sufficient cause” for not making the application within the period of limitation" should be understood and applied

I K CORPORATION,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.789 & 790/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Hybrid Hearing) I K. Corporation Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ E-407, Krishna Township, Ward -1(3)(2), Surat, Room No.203, Vs. Nr. Govindji Hall, Dabholi 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Anavil Road, Katargam, Surat-395 Business Center, Adajan Road, Surat- 004 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacfi 2599 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the small delay of 20 days and admit both the appeals. 5. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee-firm had not filed its return of income for AY 2009-10. The case was reopened within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and notice u/s 148 was issued on 23.03.2016. The assessee did not file

I K CORPORATION ,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.789 & 790/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Hybrid Hearing) I K. Corporation Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ E-407, Krishna Township, Ward -1(3)(2), Surat, Room No.203, Vs. Nr. Govindji Hall, Dabholi 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Anavil Road, Katargam, Surat-395 Business Center, Adajan Road, Surat- 004 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacfi 2599 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the small delay of 20 days and admit both the appeals. 5. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee-firm had not filed its return of income for AY 2009-10. The case was reopened within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and notice u/s 148 was issued on 23.03.2016. The assessee did not file

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

BETEX INDIA LIMITED,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

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

condone these minor delays in filing appeals and admit these three appeals for hearing on merit. 4. Although, these appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue, contain multiple grounds of appeals. However, at the time of hearing, we have carefully perused all the grounds raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee. We note that most

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. BETEX INDIA LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

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

condone these minor delays in filing appeals and admit these three appeals for hearing on merit. 4. Although, these appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue, contain multiple grounds of appeals. However, at the time of hearing, we have carefully perused all the grounds raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee. We note that most

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT, SURAT vs. DHANPRIYA PRINTS PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

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

condone these minor delays in filing appeals and admit these three appeals for hearing on merit. 4. Although, these appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue, contain multiple grounds of appeals. However, at the time of hearing, we have carefully perused all the grounds raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee. We note that most

CHIMANBHAI BHIKHABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1044/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 (Hybrid Hearing) Chimanbhai Bhikhabhai Patel Income Tax Officer , Ward-1(3)(6), बनाम/ S. No.3/2, Koliwad, Adajan Income-Tax Office, Anavil Business Vs. Gam, Adajan, Surat-395 009 Centre, Adajan Hazira Road, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afypp 4446 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 14.12.2022 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals) [in short, ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2014-15, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated

VISHAL ENTERPRISE,VYARA vs. NFAC,DELHI, ITO WARD 1, BARDOLI, INCOME TAX OFFICE-BARDOLI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1034/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Vishal Enterprise, Vs. The Ito, Vyara S.O., Vyara, Surat – 394650, Ward – 1, Gujarat Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacfv2047E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 06.08.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment years (AY) 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the basis of facts and circumstances

MANOJKUMAR ISHWARBHAI PATEL,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , BARDOLI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.710/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Manojkumar Ishwarbhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax 2/917 Sahil Bungalow, Vs. Office, Bsnl Building, Station Vallabhwadi, Bardoli-394601 Road, Bardoli-394601 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bhlpp 2872 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), dated 28.03.2023. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee are as follows:- “1. That on facts and circumstances of case as well as law on subject the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Assessing Office in assessing total income at Rs.56

GANI MOHAMMAD POPAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3, VAPI

In the result, grounds No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Popat Yasin Abdulganibhai, I.T.O., Son & L/H Of Late Gani Mohammad Ward-3, Vs. Popat, Vapi. Bombay Market, Zanda Chowk, Near S.T. Bus Depot, Vapi. Pan No. Akvpp 0747 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. Now adverting to the merit of the case. 7. Briefly stated facts of the case are that for the A.Y. 2007-08, the assessee filed return of income on 31/03/2008 declaring income of Rs. 1,50,857/- . Subsequently, the case of assessee was reopened under Section

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 HARGOVIND ISHWARBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

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

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit\nexplaining reasons for the delay. It has been stated that the assessee was\nunaware of the passing of the order by the CIT(A) since his registered e-mail\nand mobile number on the income tax portal belonged to his former\nconsultant. Due to non updation of details