KANUBHAI VANMALIBHAI PATEL HUF,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) Kanubhai Vanmalibhai Patel I.T.O.,Ward 1(2)(1), Huf,6, Siddharth Society, Surat. Vs. Behind Afil Tower, Lambe Hanuman Road, Surat-395010. Pan: Aakhp 0725 K Appellant Respondednt

54B. No doubt that there is no such observation about conducting such detailed inquiry, in the assessment order. 15. The Punjab & Haryana High Court in S.K. Kantilal (supra) held that when the assessee having sold the land after holding it for two decades and using it for agriculture purpose without effecting any improvement on the land, the earning from such

SARLABEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 54B of the Act. The ld AR of the assessee submits that that assessee claimed deduction 54B of the Act against the purchase of another agricultural land. The assessee purchased agricultural land on 20.06.2023, out of the advances received against the sale of land which was transferred by sale deed dated 17.10.2013. The Assessing Officer disallowed

KRISTINA NATHABHAI KRICHCHAN,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3), 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.349/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Hearing) Kristina Nathabhai Krichchan, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-2(3), 2/4, Zankhana Apartment, Surat. 21 Narmad Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat – 395001. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Dwipk2888D Assessee By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) 10/05/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 26/06/2023

section, the assessee is not entitled to the exemption. Thus, assessing officer held that as the assessee has not been able to get the land registered till date therefore the amount of deduction of Rs.4,04,08,003/- claimed u/s 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was disallowed

BHIKHABHAI RAJABHAI DHAMANIYA,SURAT vs. THE PCIT, SURAT-1, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.110/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhikhabhai Rajabhai Dhameliya Principal Commissioner Of 13, Krishnanagar Society, Income Tax-1, Surat, Aaykar Vs. Varachha Road, Surat-395006 Bhavan, Majuira Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aappd 7018 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 54B before allowing the deduction u/s 54B of the Act. For instance, Assessing Officer has not made any inquiry to ITA Nos.110-112/SRT/2022 A.Y.17-18 verify if the assessee was using the said land for agricultural purposes for two years immediately preceding the date on which transfer took place and considering that the assessee has not disclosed any agricultural income

DAKSHABEN SHAILESH DHAMELIYA,SURAT vs. THE PCIT-1, SURAT, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.110/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhikhabhai Rajabhai Dhameliya Principal Commissioner Of 13, Krishnanagar Society, Income Tax-1, Surat, Aaykar Vs. Varachha Road, Surat-395006 Bhavan, Majuira Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aappd 7018 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 54B before allowing the deduction u/s 54B of the Act. For instance, Assessing Officer has not made any inquiry to ITA Nos.110-112/SRT/2022 A.Y.17-18 verify if the assessee was using the said land for agricultural purposes for two years immediately preceding the date on which transfer took place and considering that the assessee has not disclosed any agricultural income

SHRI RAVJIBHAI BECHARBHAI DHAMELIYA,,SURAT vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, -1, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.110/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhikhabhai Rajabhai Dhameliya Principal Commissioner Of 13, Krishnanagar Society, Income Tax-1, Surat, Aaykar Vs. Varachha Road, Surat-395006 Bhavan, Majuira Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aappd 7018 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 54B before allowing the deduction u/s 54B of the Act. For instance, Assessing Officer has not made any inquiry to ITA Nos.110-112/SRT/2022 A.Y.17-18 verify if the assessee was using the said land for agricultural purposes for two years immediately preceding the date on which transfer took place and considering that the assessee has not disclosed any agricultural income

ITO, WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT vs. BHARATKUMAR LALJIBHAI TEJANI, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) I.T.O., Shri Bharatkumar Laljibhai Tejani, Ward-3(3)(1), 286, Vithal Nagar Society, Vs. Surat. Near Hira Baugh Circle, Varacha Road, Surat-395006. Pan: Ahbpt 5143 P Appellant Respondednt Shri Bharatkumar Laljibhai I.T.O., Tejani, Ward-3(3)(1), Vs. 286, Vithal Nagar Society, Surat. Near Hira Baugh, Varacha Road, Surat-395006. Pan: Ahbpt 5143 P Appellant Respondednt

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 3,91,95,831/- u/s. 54B of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to establish with documentary evidences that the agricultural activities have been carried out by him at least for a period of two years immediately preceding the dates of transfer ? 3. Whether on facts

BHARATKUMAR L. TEJANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) I.T.O., Shri Bharatkumar Laljibhai Tejani, Ward-3(3)(1), 286, Vithal Nagar Society, Vs. Surat. Near Hira Baugh Circle, Varacha Road, Surat-395006. Pan: Ahbpt 5143 P Appellant Respondednt Shri Bharatkumar Laljibhai I.T.O., Tejani, Ward-3(3)(1), Vs. 286, Vithal Nagar Society, Surat. Near Hira Baugh, Varacha Road, Surat-395006. Pan: Ahbpt 5143 P Appellant Respondednt

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 3,91,95,831/- u/s. 54B of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to establish with documentary evidences that the agricultural activities have been carried out by him at least for a period of two years immediately preceding the dates of transfer ? 3. Whether on facts

SALIM AHMED MOHAMED SAFI PATEL,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Salim Ahmed Mohamed Safi Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Khanji Street, Kanthariya, Bharuch- Bharuch, Aaykar Bhavan, Station Vs. 392015 Road, Bharuch-392001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bmapp 3521 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ"/Respondent)

disallowances made by Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Bharuch u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Appellant prays and appeals that the Ld. A.O Ward-1(4) Bharuch has erred in law and on facts in making the following additions: 1. Addition of Rs.23,92,000/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain

SANJAYKUMAR ARVINDBHAI RUPARELIYA L/H ARVINDBHAI BALUBHAI RUPARELIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(1)(2), SURAT

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

Bench: MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 17.10.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short

LABHU BALUBHAI GHEVARIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(4), SURAT

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

Bench: Shridinesh Mohan Sinha& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.809/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Labhu Balubhai Ghevariya Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 3, Ila Park Society Opp. Ward—3(2)(4), Surat Aayakar Vs. Katargam Police Station, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395 Katargam, Surat-395004 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Akdpp0165A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Appellant By Shri P.M. Jagasheth, Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Respondent By Shriajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 04.06.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 143(3)of the Act dated

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)

disallowance of Rs.1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 53. Succinct facts qua the issue are that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer noted that assessee had claimed exemption of Rs.1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the Act. The assessee IT(SS)A Nos.23, 24/SRT/2021, 90/SRT/2022 & ITA Nos. 118, 121/SRT/2021 Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad claimed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.,2, SURAT vs. VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD, 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)

disallowance of Rs.1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 53. Succinct facts qua the issue are that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer noted that assessee had claimed exemption of Rs.1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the Act. The assessee IT(SS)A Nos.23, 24/SRT/2021, 90/SRT/2022 & ITA Nos. 118, 121/SRT/2021 Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad claimed

ASHOKKUMAR PRABHULAL MEHTA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Ld. Add. Cit(A) Who Has Given Four Opportunities Of Hearing Between 13.01.2021 To 06.10.2025. The Assessee Neither Responded To The Notices & Nor Sought For Adjournments, Thereby, The Appeal Was Dismissed Ex-Parte.

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 1303/SRT/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 2 Ashokkumar Prabhulal Mehta Vs. ITO 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 28.03.2014 declaring