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

RAZAK ABDULKARIM MANSURI,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7, VAPI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha&Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

condonation of delay. During the period under consideration, the appellant was commission agent. He was engaged in a distributorship of Suvidha Infoserve Pvt. Ltd and had earned commission income from the same. He had earned rent ~ 2 ~ ITA- 352/SRT/2024 Razak Abdulkarim Mansuri income from the house property

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

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

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

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 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from

CHINTANBHAI LAVJIBHAI DANKHARA,SURAT vs. ITO, SURAT

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta

house property the source of which remained unexplained. The order under Section 147 was passed ex-parte since the assessee failed to participate in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. Chintanbhai Lavjibhai Dankhara vs. ITO Asst.Year –2011-12 3. The matter was carried in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where again the assessee failed to prosecute the appeal

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

condone the delay in filing of appeal and allow the appeal to be proceeded with on merit. The Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under: 5. “[1] On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat Vs. Kejriwal

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

property merely on presumption basis without providing any evidence to assume the contrary. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned C1T(A) has erred in not accepting the claim of the Appellant and confirming the addition on presumptions, without providing any opportunity for rebuttal of allegations made

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

property merely on presumption basis without providing any evidence to assume the contrary. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned C1T(A) has erred in not accepting the claim of the Appellant and confirming the addition on presumptions, without providing any opportunity for rebuttal of allegations made

JERAMBHAI BHAGVANBHAI GOHIL,VARACHHA, SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

delay in 3 Jerambhai B Gohil filing of assessee’s appeal is condoned. Now adverting the merit of the case. 5. At the outset of hearing, Ld Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submitted that he is not pressing Ground No.1, which relates to re-opening of assessment under section 147 of the Act. Considering the submission

VIRAL SHAILESH SHAH,VALSAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, VALSAD, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.536/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Viral Shailesh Shah, Vs. The Acit, C/O. Dr. Shailesh V. Shah, B/H. Valsad Circle, Pramanik Store, Opp. Atul First Valsad Gate, Atul, Valsad – 396020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfaps6008A (Assessee) (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 4. Brief facts of the issue in dispute are stated as under. The assessee is an Individual before me and had not filed his return of income for financial year 2010-11, relevant to AY.2011-12 required as per section 139 of I.T. Act. Therefore, assessee’s case was re- opened

JAYESH DOLATBHAI PATEL,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD 2, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical 8

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.287/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Jayesh Dolatbhai Patel, Vs. Ito, Shop No.1, Arihant Saroj, M.G. Ward – 2, Road, Old Navyug Store, Valsad Valsad - 396001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Apmpp3588D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Ms Jaishree Thakur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/11/2025

delays in filling appeal are condoned and admitted for hearing. 6. The facts of the case are that there was a survey u/s 133A of the Act in case of the assessee on 10.12.2016. One loose paper folder bearing identification mark BF-8 was impounded during the survey. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued on 29.03.2019. The assessee filed return

TARIT F. DAS,BHARUCH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.1, BHARUCH

In the result this ground of appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Tarit F Das, A.C.I.T., Aaa-49, Shreeji Sadan Bungalows, Circle-1, Vs. Swaminarayan Mandir Road, Bharuch. Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch. Pan No. Acgpd 8543 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

delay is filing the appeal is condoned. Now adverting to the merits of the case, 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a proprietor of M/s Das Fabrication engaged in the business of fabrication work, labour supply for load and unloading of coal and salt on hiring. The assessee while filing the return of income offered

ISHVARBHAI LALLUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1046/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Ishvarbhai Lallubhai Patel, Vs. The Assessment Unit, House No.3, Navapara Village Kosad, Nfac, Surat - 394107 Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Caepp6924J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Dinesh Ramani, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2025

House No.3, Navapara Village Kosad, NFAC, Surat - 394107 Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: CAEPP6924J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Dinesh Ramani, CA Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 10/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section

PRITI BHANSALI,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD 1 , BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the penalty levied is deleted

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamblepriti Bhansali, Income Tax Officer, Vs. D 1, Rajashree Nagar, Ward-1, Umalla, Bharuch. Bharuch-39310. [Pan : Agspb2559 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, Ar Respondent By: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23.01.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

property documents only for nominee purposes, as per the housing society rules. An ex-parte order under section 148A was passed on 01.04.2022, and consequential notices were uploaded on the income-tax portal. The assessee had Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2– not activated her e-filing portal account earlier and activated the same for the first time on 27.04.2024, only