BALMUKUND M VAISHNAV,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(7), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Surat. 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.205/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2013-14) Balmukund M. Vaishnav, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 5B/1054, Ramnanth Mahadev Ni Surat. Sheri, Haripura, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aokpv5065Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment, it shall be deemed that any notice under any of the provision of the Act, which is required to be served upon him, has been duly served upon him in time in accordance with the provisions of the Act and such assessee shall be precluded from taking any objection in any proceeding or inquiry under the Act that

ITO, WARD-2(3)(2), SURAT, SURAT vs. KISHOR BHANUBHAI ASODARIA, SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

reassessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts of the case are the assessee is an individual filed his return of income for the asst. year 2015-16 declaring taxable income of Rs.3

KANCHAN DEVI AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Bijayananda Pruseth

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA and that all notices issued beyond the surviving period were time barred and liable to be set aside. This time- line was also demonstrated in para 112 of the order with an illustration. In the present case

KANCHAN DEVI AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Bijayananda Pruseth

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA and that all notices issued beyond the surviving period were time barred and liable to be set aside. This time- line was also demonstrated in para 112 of the order with an illustration. In the present case

JYOTIBEN KETAN KUMAR RANA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.354/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Smt. Jyotiben Ketankumar Income Tax Officer, Rana, Ward- 1(2)(2) Surat 79 Jangnath Society, Khatodara Udhna Surat Pan: Akapr 7370 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

2)Surat/I.T.A.No. 354/SRT/2017/A.Y. 09-10 Page 3 of 12 observed that the appellant has never raised any objection during the assessment proceedings regarding the reopening of the assessment. The appellant had filed the return of income in compliance to notice under section 148 of the Act and participated in the reassessment

SHRI HARESH P. SHAH, L/H OF LATE MANJULA P. SHAH,,VALSAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, VALSAD

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.894/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2006-07) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sh. Haresh P. Shah, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Legal Heir, Late Manjula P. Shah, Valsad Ram, Appartment, I/A, Block No.4, 1St Floor, Opp. Ramwadi, Valsad, Valsad-396001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ayeps2205H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah - Ca Respondent By : Ms Anupama Singla – Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

2-12-2009. It is also an admitted fact that the notice under section 148 to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10 has been issued against the dead person, i.e., the deceased assessee. Thus the reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT vs. SHRI ANIL PUKHRAJ JAIN, SURAT

In the result the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.89/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Anil Pukhraj Jain, Room No.414, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Prop. Of Aakruti Stone, 206-2Nd Floor, Tulsi Building, Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Vs. Somnath Mahadev Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent)/ "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahapj8569Q ""या"ेप सं Cross Objection No.10/Srt/2021 (A/O Ita No.89/Srt/2017) िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) Anil Pukhraj Jain, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Room No.414, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Prop. Of Aakruti Stone, 206- 2Nd Floor, Tulsi Building, Vs. Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Somnath Mahadev Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395009. Appellant/Co-Objector (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahapj8569Q िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23/12/2022 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23/ 01/2023

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148

VAPI MARCHANT SAVING AND CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LIMITED ,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9, VAPI, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Vapi Merchant Saving & Credit Ito Ward-9, Co-Op Society Ltd., Income Tax Office, Nr. Vaishali Office No. 130, First Floor, Varun Vs. Char Rasta, Nh-8, Gidc, Complex, Opp. Reliance Super Vapi-396191. Market Gidc, Vapi-396195. Pan No. Aaaav 3925 E Appellant Respondent

148 of the act, on 31/03/2017. In response filed return of income for the first time declaring Nil income after return of income for the first time declaring Nil income after return of income for the first time declaring Nil income after claiming deduction of claiming deduction of ₹14,61,780/- under section 80P(2)(a)(i) under section

MOHANBHAI RAGHAVBHAI BELADIYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2)(5), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Mohanbhai Raghavbhai Beladiya, Vs. The Ito, 41-42, Vishnu Nagar Society – 1, Ward-3(2)(5), Ankur Char Rasta, A. K. Road, Surat Surat – 395008. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aospb9227J (Assessee) (Respondent)

2) of section 143 after receipt of fresh return submitted by the assessee in response to notice under section 148, the ITA.359/SRT/2023/AY.2012-13 Mohanbhai Raghavbhai Beladiya entire procedure adopted for escaped assessment, shall not be valid. Based on this legal position, I quash the reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ACIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE DY.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ADDL.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-opening the assessment under section 148 of the Act in spite of the fact that reassessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. RADHA MADHAV ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK, VAPI

2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. RADHA MADHAV ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK, VAPI

reassessment proceedings were also addressed.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section

DESIGNER EXIM PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 1(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S Designer Exim Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., D-1203, Panchsheel Heights, Opp.- Ward 1(1)(2), Vs. Pizza Hut, Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali Surat. West, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400067 Pan No. Aabcd 4298 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

reassessment, he may inform the Assessing Officer of his decision. In such event, earlier return is treated as fresh return submitted in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. Such view is find support from the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in Tiwari Kanhaiya Lal Vs CIT (supra). 7. I find that neither the assessing officer