VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, SILVASSA WARD , SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

VIKAS AGARWAL,SILVASSA vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

10. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee did not filed his return of income for AY 2014-15. An information was flagged on the Insight portal of the Income tax department under High Risk CRIU/VRU category in case of the assessee for the FY 2013-14. An enquiry/investigation was carried

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

u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that penalty imposed by assessing officer and confirmed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may please be deleted.” 2. On perusal of record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) passed impugned order on 20.08.2015, however, this appeal was filed on 02.05.2018. Thus, there is a delay

SANJAYBHAI DAMJIBHAI GOLAKIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.951/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Sanjaybhai Damjibhai Golakiya, Vs. The Assessment Unit, D-74, Vithalnagar Society, Hirabaug, Income-Tax Department, Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 Jurisdictional Ao: The Ito, Ward – 3(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Alopg2048R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

Section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the appellant filed appeal u/s 253(1) of the Act on 09.09.2024, vide ITA No.951/SRT/2024, against the order dated 15.02.2024, which was uploaded on the Income-tax e-filing

SHRI BHARATKUMAR T. PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1),, SURAT

In the result, Ground No.1 of appeal is allowed

10% which was Rs.1,20,00,000/- being commission earned for providing book entry of Rs.12 crore to M/s. PACL Ltd. and added to the total income of the assessee. For this addition penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) were also initiated. For which, penalty show cause notice u/s.274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 26.03.2014 and was duly served

VIJAYBHAN SINGH RAJPUT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(4), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Vijaybhan Singh Rajput, I.T.O., Plot No. 131/3, Near Shrisati Tex Ward-2(3)(4), Vs. Prints, Gidc, Pandesara, Surat. Surat. Pan No. Abxpr 3970 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

46,76,143/- and levied penalty @ 100% of tax sought to be evaded. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty by holding that the assessee has not disclosed any particular regarding the value adopted by Stamp Valuation Officer for determining the capital gain. 8. We find that almost on similar set of facts, the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal while considering

N CORE CABLES,DAMAN vs. THE ACIT,VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.323 To 327/Srt/2018 Ays: (2005-06 To 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.689/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri A. Gopalkrishnan, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 10/10/2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2022

10 days because of their past experience. The Purchases of raw materials has never been disputed by the AO either in the original assessment order or in the remand report. The assessee sufficiently substantiated the diesel purchase bills and the AO has not controverted the same except to point out some discrepancy in the invoice number, which is third-party

N CORE CABLES,DAMAN vs. THE ACIT,VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.323 To 327/Srt/2018 Ays: (2005-06 To 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.689/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri A. Gopalkrishnan, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 10/10/2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2022

10 days because of their past experience. The Purchases of raw materials has never been disputed by the AO either in the original assessment order or in the remand report. The assessee sufficiently substantiated the diesel purchase bills and the AO has not controverted the same except to point out some discrepancy in the invoice number, which is third-party

N CORE CABLES,DAMAN vs. THE ACIT,VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.323 To 327/Srt/2018 Ays: (2005-06 To 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.689/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri A. Gopalkrishnan, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 10/10/2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2022

10 days because of their past experience. The Purchases of raw materials has never been disputed by the AO either in the original assessment order or in the remand report. The assessee sufficiently substantiated the diesel purchase bills and the AO has not controverted the same except to point out some discrepancy in the invoice number, which is third-party

N CORE CABLES,,DAMAN vs. THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for AY 2005-06 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.323 To 327/Srt/2018 Ays: (2005-06 To 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.689/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) N. Core Cables, Vs. The Acit, Vapi Circle, Gala No.7, Plot No.10, Primier Vapi. Industrial Area, Kachigam, Daman-396210, U.T Of Daman & Diu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefn7954N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri A. Gopalkrishnan, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 10/10/2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2022

10 days because of their past experience. The Purchases of raw materials has never been disputed by the AO either in the original assessment order or in the remand report. The assessee sufficiently substantiated the diesel purchase bills and the AO has not controverted the same except to point out some discrepancy in the invoice number, which is third-party

RUGHNATHPURA SAURASHTRA NAGRIK DHIRAN SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), SURAT

In the result, both the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. That on facts, in law and on evidence on record, it ought to have been held that there is no neither concealment of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income within the meaning of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The appellant craved liberty to add, alter, amend

RUGHNATHPURA SAURASHTRA NAGRIK DHIRAN SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), SURAT

In the result, both the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. That on facts, in law and on evidence on record, it ought to have been held that there is no neither concealment of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income within the meaning of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The appellant craved liberty to add, alter, amend

RUGHNATHPURA SAURASHTRA NAGRIK DHIRAN SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), SURAT

In the result, both the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. That on facts, in law and on evidence on record, it ought to have been held that there is no neither concealment of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income within the meaning of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The appellant craved liberty to add, alter, amend

SHREE HARI PROCESSORS INDIA PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1)(2) (NEW ITO WD. 2(1)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shree Hari Processors India Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd., Block No.99/P, Post Ward-2(1)(2), [New Ito Wd Vs Tatithaiya, 2(1)(3)] Aayakar Bhawan, Tal-Palsana, Majura Gate, Surat-394 372 Surat-395001 E-Mail:Jain_Tex@Yahoo.Com Pan : Aadca 1313 N Appellant /Assessee Respondent / Revenue

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act 2 The penalty of Rs.7,55,913/- may be kindly deleted Any other relief that your Nil honours may deem fit maybe granted 3 The assessee craves leave to add, amend, modify alter or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee