KAMLESH SINGH,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(2)(2), , SURAT

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only, except the appeal against the order under section 271F

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiita No.227/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 144/ 147] Ita No.228/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(B)] Ita No.229/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(C)] Ita No.230/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271-B]

250(6) of the Act. Considering ITA No.227-231/Srt/2021 Sh. Kamlesh Singh Vs ITO Wd.2(2)(2) SRT the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing all the appeal without giving fair and reasonable opportunity and without hearing the submission on the objection of filing

KAMLESH SINGH,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(2)(2), , SURAT

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only, except the appeal against the order under section 271F

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiita No.227/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 144/ 147] Ita No.228/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(B)] Ita No.229/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(C)] Ita No.230/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271-B]

250(6) of the Act. Considering ITA No.227-231/Srt/2021 Sh. Kamlesh Singh Vs ITO Wd.2(2)(2) SRT the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing all the appeal without giving fair and reasonable opportunity and without hearing the submission on the objection of filing

KAMLESH SINGH,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(2)(2), , SURAT

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only, except the appeal against the order under section 271F

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiita No.227/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 144/ 147] Ita No.228/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(B)] Ita No.229/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(C)] Ita No.230/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271-B]

250(6) of the Act. Considering ITA No.227-231/Srt/2021 Sh. Kamlesh Singh Vs ITO Wd.2(2)(2) SRT the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing all the appeal without giving fair and reasonable opportunity and without hearing the submission on the objection of filing

KAMLESH SINGH,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(2)(2), , SURAT

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only, except the appeal against the order under section 271F

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiita No.227/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 144/ 147] Ita No.228/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(B)] Ita No.229/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271(1)(C)] Ita No.230/Srt/2021 [Order Under Section 271-B]

250(6) of the Act. Considering ITA No.227-231/Srt/2021 Sh. Kamlesh Singh Vs ITO Wd.2(2)(2) SRT the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing all the appeal without giving fair and reasonable opportunity and without hearing the submission on the objection of filing

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

6 of the appellate\norder u/s 250 of the Act. He has dismissed the ground of the assessee by\nstating that there is no requirement to conduct enquiry and provide\nopportunity u/s 148A of the Act before issue of notice u/s 148 in cases\ncovered u/s 132 of the Act. He observed that the AO appears to have\nprovided opportunity

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

6 of the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act. He has dismissed the ground of the assessee by stating that there is no requirement to conduct enquiry and provide opportunity u/s 148A of the Act before issue of notice u/s 148 in cases covered u/s 132 of the Act. He observed that the AO appears to have provided opportunity

MEENAXI GEMS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(4), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainimeenaxi Gems Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., 320, A, Panchratna, Opera House, Ward-1(1)(4), Vs. Mumbai-400004. Surat. Pan No. Aadcm 4645 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

reassessment order passed u/s 147 is bad in law since had been issued in absence of fresh tangible material, without independent application of judicial mind and without having valid reason to believe of escapement of income; 4.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of entire alleged non-genuine

SURESHKUMAR MAVJIBHAI BHINGARADIA, INDIVIDUAL,BHARUCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Sureshkumar Mavjibhai Bhingaradia, Vs. The Acit, Plot No.3441/B, Near Pci Chowkdi, Circle – 2(1)(1), Gidc Estate, Bharuch - 393002 Vadodara "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acqpb6047G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Advocate Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/02/2025

section 250 of the Act. This decision has been followed by Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs. K. Ravindranathan Nair, 265 ITR 217 (Ker.). The purpose of Rule 46A appears to be ensured that evidence is primarily led before the AO. In the present case, we find that the assessee had filed all details during original

JAYENDRASINH BHIKHUBHAI SOLANKI,SILVASSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- SILVASSA, SILVASSA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jidicial Member & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1244/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Processing Hearing) Jayendrasinh Bhikhubhai Solanki बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Silvassa Ward, 37/3, Trimurti Bhavan, High School Vs. Income Tax Office, Vee Bee Mall, Faliya, Naroli, Silvassa-396 230 Near Civil Court, Tokarkhada, Silvassa -396 230 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Angps 4011 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

reassessment proceeding under section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider that no other addition is permissible, if no addition made on basis of reasons recorded for reopening. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred

YUSUFBHAI GAFURBHAI SHAIKH,SURAT vs. I.T.O WARD- 3(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) for Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned CIT (Appeal) NFAC Delhi, has erred in confirming the re- opening of the case of appellant under explanation 2 (a) of section 147 of the Act, Such re-opening is authorized where

JITENDRAKUMAR AMBELAL PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD-3, NAVSARI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Jitendrakumarambelal Patel Ito, Ward-3, 52, Kanbiwad. At & Po-Pananj, Room No. 108, Swapnalok Soc., Tal-Chikhli, Navsari-396521 Vs. Near Kaliawadi Bridge, Navsari - 396521 Pan No. Bncpp 7509 R Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings. 6.2 It is now well-settled by a long line of judicial authorities, settled by a long line of judicial authorities, settled by a long line of judicial authorities, both domestic and international, that at the threshold stage of both domestic and international, that at the threshold stage of both domestic and international, that at the threshold stage

M/S. BASE INDUSTRIES LTD.,SILVASSA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI WARD -1, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 are illegal bad in law as the approval u/s 151 of the Act is invalid and bad in law. That the purported approval has been granted without any application of mind and therefore, the same is not in terms of the provisions of Section 151” ITA No.1581/AHD/2013 (AY 13-14)& M/s Base

RADHA MADHAV ECO-INDUSTRIAL PARK,VALSAD vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.762/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2021-22) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.625/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent)

6 of the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act. He has dismissed the ground of the assessee by stating that there is no requirement to conduct enquiry and provide opportunity u/s 148A of the Act before issue of notice u/s 148 in cases covered u/s 132 of the Act. He observed that the AO appears to have provided opportunity

RADHA MADHAV ECO-INDUSTRIAL PARK,VAPI vs. ACIT, CENTARL CIRCLE-1, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.762/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2021-22) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.625/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent)

6 of the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act. He has dismissed the ground of the assessee by stating that there is no requirement to conduct enquiry and provide opportunity u/s 148A of the Act before issue of notice u/s 148 in cases covered u/s 132 of the Act. He observed that the AO appears to have provided opportunity

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. RADHA MADHAV ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.762/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2021-22) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.625/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) The Acit, Vs. Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Central Circle – 1, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Vapi Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Radha Madhav Eco-Industrial Park, Vs. The Acit, Village Degam, Opp – Padmavati Central Circle – 1, Logistics, Nasik Road, Degam, Tal – Vapi, Vapi District – Valsad – 396191, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaofr2845L (Appellant) (Respondent)

6 of the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act. He has dismissed the ground of the assessee by stating that there is no requirement to conduct enquiry and provide opportunity u/s 148A of the Act before issue of notice u/s 148 in cases covered u/s 132 of the Act. He observed that the AO appears to have provided opportunity

NARPATSINH PRABHATSINH SOLANKI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1, SURAT

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

reassessment order cannot\nbe condoned by referring to section 292BB of the Act.\n(6) When the assessee had filed return of income, it is mandatory to issue\nnotice u/s 143(2) of the Act before finalising the assessment proceedings\n(7) The Hon. Delhi High Court had also taken the similar view in the case of\nPri

TULSI JEWELLERS,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 5, NAVSARI

In the result assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.946 & 947/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 (Hybrid Hearing) Tulsi Jewellers Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, बनाम/ 7-8, Saibaba Complex Navsari, 204, 2Nd Floor, Income Vs. Gauaarbag, Nr Lmp School Tax Office, Charpool, Awabaug, Chikhli Roa Bilimora, Tal: Navsari-396 445 Gandevi-396 321 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aakft 8368 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit-Dr & Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 07/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2025

250 of the Act. He condoned the delay and held that the reopening of the assessment u/s.147 was valid and based on a reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment. He also upheld the addition of Rs.13,20,000/- u/s.69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the appellant has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 6

TULSI JEWELLERS,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5, NAVSARI

In the result assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.946 & 947/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 (Hybrid Hearing) Tulsi Jewellers Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, बनाम/ 7-8, Saibaba Complex Navsari, 204, 2Nd Floor, Income Vs. Gauaarbag, Nr Lmp School Tax Office, Charpool, Awabaug, Chikhli Roa Bilimora, Tal: Navsari-396 445 Gandevi-396 321 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aakft 8368 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit-Dr & Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 07/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2025

250 of the Act. He condoned the delay and held that the reopening of the assessment u/s.147 was valid and based on a reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment. He also upheld the addition of Rs.13,20,000/- u/s.69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the appellant has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 6

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)

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, is bad in law as the same has been disposed off without examining the merits of the case and is against the principles of natural justice. 3. That the CIT(A) has erred in making addition of opening cash balance arbitrarily and without assigning any cogent reason and without bringing any evidence