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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act were also initiated for failure to comply with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and for failure to file return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act respectively. 10.3 Aggrieved by the order of AO, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT(A). Before

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. PATDI COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1810/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Krish Corporation, Central Circle-3, C-1175 To 1191, Surat. Radha Krishna Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat – 395 003. [Pan: Aahfk 9281C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (#$थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1811/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12

271(1)(c) explanation 5[2] but the provisions are akin to Section 271AAA[2], There are various other court decisions also which support this view that-if assessee declares voluntarily, additional income during the statement u/s. 132[4j and states the manner of earning said income supported by identified assets and taxes along with interest paid thereon, the conditions

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. KRISH CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1810/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Krish Corporation, Central Circle-3, C-1175 To 1191, Surat. Radha Krishna Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat – 395 003. [Pan: Aahfk 9281C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (#$थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1811/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12

271(1)(c) explanation 5[2] but the provisions are akin to Section 271AAA[2], There are various other court decisions also which support this view that-if assessee declares voluntarily, additional income during the statement u/s. 132[4j and states the manner of earning said income supported by identified assets and taxes along with interest paid thereon, the conditions

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. SHRI VINOD J. PATEL,, SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1810/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Krish Corporation, Central Circle-3, C-1175 To 1191, Surat. Radha Krishna Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat – 395 003. [Pan: Aahfk 9281C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (#$थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1811/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12

271(1)(c) explanation 5[2] but the provisions are akin to Section 271AAA[2], There are various other court decisions also which support this view that-if assessee declares voluntarily, additional income during the statement u/s. 132[4j and states the manner of earning said income supported by identified assets and taxes along with interest paid thereon, the conditions

SHANKARLAL C SHAH,,SURAT vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1359 & 1481/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shankarlal C. Shah, The Acit, Central Circle-4, Vs. 199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeups4161E The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant)

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act are being initiated separately.” ITA.1359 & 1481/AHD/2016 Assessment Year. 2012-13 Shankarlal C Shah & Manish K. Patel 19. Aggrieved by the order of the ld CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 20. In respect of additional grounds, ld Counsel pleads that action of the Assessing Officer in framing

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, SURAT vs. SHRI MANISH KASHIRAM PATEL,, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1359 & 1481/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shankarlal C. Shah, The Acit, Central Circle-4, Vs. 199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeups4161E The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant)

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act are being initiated separately.” ITA.1359 & 1481/AHD/2016 Assessment Year. 2012-13 Shankarlal C Shah & Manish K. Patel 19. Aggrieved by the order of the ld CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 20. In respect of additional grounds, ld Counsel pleads that action of the Assessing Officer in framing

SHRI FARSURAM RATILAL BHAMWALA,,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Cit(A) After Considering The Case Of Both The Parties Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee.

penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act.” Ground No. 1 4. This ground raised by the assessee relates to challenging the order of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of ITO in making additions of Rs. 5,36,556/- u/s. 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Ld. A.R. appearing on behalf

M/S. RAJ ENTERPRISE,,SURAT vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6,, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Penalty Proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income/concealment of income.” 11. On the basis of aforesaid observation, the AO made addition of Rs.7.96 crore to the total income of assessee. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A).Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. RAJ ENTERPRISES,, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Penalty Proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income/concealment of income.” 11. On the basis of aforesaid observation, the AO made addition of Rs.7.96 crore to the total income of assessee. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A).Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed

M/S. RAJ ENTERPRISE,,SURAT vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6,, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

Penalty Proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income/concealment of income.” 11. On the basis of aforesaid observation, the AO made addition of Rs.7.96 crore to the total income of assessee. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A).Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed

MOHAMMED ANIS GULAM MOHAMMED MEMON,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(7), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.227/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Mohammed Anis Gulam Mohammed Vs. The Ito, Memon, Ward – 1(3)(7), 48, Memon Nagar Society, Nr. Surat Bharucha Apartment, Khandakuwa, Rander, Surat - 395005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aljpm3607K (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty u/s 271(1)(b) and finalization of your assessment u/s 144 of the Act.” 6. In response to the said notice, the assessee vide his reply dated, 25.09.2017, submitted before Assessing Officer, which is reproduced as follows: ITA.227/SRT/2019/AY.2015-16 Mohammed Anis Gulam Mohammed Momon “In response to the above noted notice I had a good fortune to see your good

JIGNESH MAHNDRALAL BHARUCHI,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

131 (Delhi - Trib.)/[2015] 154 ITD 617 (Delhi - Trib.) [06-05-2015], the ITAT held that penalty under section 271(1)(b) cannot be imposed for each and every notice issued under section 143(2), which remained not complied with on part of assessee, but it should be restricted to first default only. In the instant case

KANAIYALAL LABHUBHAI NAROLA,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,(2), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurpose

131 taxmann.com 42 (Guj.). Accordingly, he dismissed the\nground on re-opening of the assessment proceedings.\n4.1\nThe other ground was regarding addition of Rs.3,00,00,000/- u/s 68 of\nthe Act. The facts leading to the above addition has been discussed at para 5.1.1 of\nthe appellate order. The appellant in the written submission had reiterated the\ncontention