DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. BETEX INDIA LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

reassessment proceedings, if the twin conditions prescribed ITA Nos.52/SRT/2022 & 171, 174/SRT/2021/IT(SS)A 69, 70, 75 & 76/SRT/2021 Betex India Ltd. & Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd. under Section

THE WAGRA TALUKA CO. OPERATIVE MARKETING & PROCESSING SOCIETY LTD.,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) The Wagra Taluka Co-Operative I.T.O. Marketing & Processing Society Ward 1(5), Vs. Limited, Bharuch. At & Post:Wagra, Taluka- Wagra, District - Bharuch (Gujarat). M. No. 8128950676 E.Mail: Mrmconsultants@Yahoo.Com Pan: Aaaat 2404 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

reassessment, reference can be made under Section 142A of the Act without rejecting the books of account but in order to make reference under Section 142A, valuation must be with regard to property, asset, investment as stated in the provisions of Section 69

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. DEEPESH VISHNU AGARWAL, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

reassessment proceedings was found to be without infirmity.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": ["Section 148", "Section 148A", "Section 149", "Section 151", "Section 115BBE", "Section 69

MAHOTSAV CREATION PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, -1,, SURAT

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.49 & 50/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 101-102, 1St Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

69 Held, yes Whether where assessee had given particulars of registration of investing/applicant companies confirmation from share applicants bank accounts details. Arceli Realty Limited (Formerly known as Ellora Electricals Ltd.) vs Income Tax Officer - 15(1)(1), Mumbai in ITA No.6492/Mum/2016 dated 21.04.2017 "The satisfaction has to be derived from the relevant facts and that to on the basis

MAHOTSAV CREATION PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, -1,, SURAT

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.49 & 50/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 101-102, 1St Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

69 Held, yes Whether where assessee had given particulars of registration of investing/applicant companies confirmation from share applicants bank accounts details. Arceli Realty Limited (Formerly known as Ellora Electricals Ltd.) vs Income Tax Officer - 15(1)(1), Mumbai in ITA No.6492/Mum/2016 dated 21.04.2017 "The satisfaction has to be derived from the relevant facts and that to on the basis

SUMITLAL,SURAT vs. ITO, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Sumitlal, Ito 101-B/2, Sanskrut Flats Umra, Aayakar Bhavan, Bharthana, Vs. Surat-395007. Surat-395007 Pan No. Acxpl 1238 Q Appellant Respondent

reassessment ex parte ex parte under sections 147 read with 144 of the Act on 23.10.2017, treating the sections 147 read with 144 of the Act on 23.10.2017, treating the sections 147 read with 144 of the Act on 23.10.2017, treating the sum of ₹22,24,315/ 22,24,315/- representing the investment in mutual representing the investment in mutual

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ANAVIL BUSINESS CENTRE, ADAJAN vs. ABHISHEK NAVNIT DOSHI , MAHIDHARPURA

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Ito, Abhishek Navnit Doshi, 405, Income Tax Office, Anavil 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Business Centre, Hazira Road, Vs. Jin Shanti Bldg. Mahidharpura, Adajan, Surat-395003. Surat-395009. Pan No. Afhpd 0064 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings, the assessee furnished audit reports, bank statements, export invoices, purchase bills, bank statements, export invoices, purchase bills, bank statements, export invoices, purchase bills, sales registers, and ledger accounts, asserting that all payments sales registers, and ledger accounts, asserting that all payments sales registers, and ledger accounts, asserting that all payments had been effected through recognised banking channels

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

DHAVAL INDRAVADAN GANDHI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2, BARDOLI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shri Dhaval Indravadan Gandhi, Ito Ward-2, At & Post Areth, Tal Mandvi, Aayakar Bhavan, Janta Nagar Surat-394160. Vs. Society, Bardoli-394601. Pan No. Ajjpg 4246 J Appellant Respondent

69 of the Act and added of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee, initiating penalty the same to the total income of the assessee, initiating penalty the same to the total income of the assessee, initiating penalty ITA No. 601/SRT/2025 4 Shri Dhaval Indravadan Gandhi Shri Dhaval Indravadan Gandhi proceedings under section

SHRI ASHISH NATVARLAL VASHI,,NA vs. ARIVS.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3522/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Ashish Natvarlal Vashi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tolat Falia, At & Post. Kaccholi, Navsari. Taluka Gandevi, Dist: Navsari, Navsari - 396370. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abypv5202C (Assessee) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings is a legal issue which goes to the root of the matter and no further inquiry is needed for deciding the said legal issue as all facts are already on record, hence we admit the said additional ground of appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 6. Facts of the case which can be stated quite shortly

M/S. PATEL AMBALAL HARGOVANDAS & CO.,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

In the results, appeal filed by Revenue (in IT(SS)A Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.49/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Rasikbhai Narottamdas Patel, Surat. Flat No.9-10, Mahavir Nagar Co.Op H.S. Ltd., Bldg-12, Nr. Gayatri Mandir, Udhna Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Adgpp4550M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.86/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Ashish Karamshibhai Koshiya, Surat. 40, Jivandeep Soceity, Singanpor Road, Katargam, Surat, Gujarat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aojpk1118G (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.185/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2020-21) M/S. Patel Ambalal Hargovandas Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-2 & Co., Surat. 5/725, Haripura, Bhavaniwad, Opp. Dhobi Sheri, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aadfp2517N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Shri Vartik Choksi, Shri Biren Shah & Shri Respondent By Nitin Gheewala, Ar Date Of Hearing 26/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

reassessment, being to tax an income which has escaped assessment. In that case again it will tantamount to reopening assessment on the basis of an item of income or disallowance, which has already been made in block assessment of the assessee, thereby leaving no income escaping assessment. Under these circumstances we are satisfied that having made addition of Rs.527.85 lakhs

JAYANTILAL HIRABHAI PATAL,SURAT vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of the appeal raised by the appellant is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Dipikaben J. Patel, I.T.O.(International (Legal Heir Of Late Mr. Jayantilal H Patel), Taxation), Vs. 19/B, Suryadarshan Society-2, Pragati Surat. Villa, Segvi Road, Valsad-396001. Pan No. Arypp 2776 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

69 of the Act. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 26/12/2017. 3. On coming to know about the additions in the assessment order against the assessee, the legal heirs of assessee/appellant filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), in the statement of fact [as recorded

RITESHKUMAR BHUPENDRABHAI CHOKSI,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

reassessment u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Act, making additions aggregating to Rs.21,99,192/- on account of cash deposits treated as unexplained u/s 69

RITESHKUMAR BHUPENDRABHAI CHOKSI,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

reassessment u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Act, making additions aggregating to Rs.21,99,192/- on account of cash deposits treated as unexplained u/s 69

SHRI HARSHADBHAI VALLABHBHAI PATEL,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, VALSAD

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.194/Srt/2017 & 356/Srt/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 & 2010-11 Shri Harshadbhai Vallabhai V. Income Tax Officer, Patel , Ward- 3, Valsad At & Post Tighra, Nava Falia, Via- Dungari Valsad 393 375 Pan: [Afspp 8443 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Rajesh M. Upadhyay, Itp िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Mrs. Anupama Singla, Sr.D.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By 09.12.2019 सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 10.12.2019 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Am: 1. The Above Captioned Two Appeal By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Valsad [In Short “The Cit(A)”] Dated 06.09.2017 & 20.05.2019 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 143 (3) Read With Section 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward- -3, Valsad (In Short “The Ao”).

69 could be made. In the alternate, it was submitted that if agricultural income is considered of the family members, then the same may be treated as loan to the assessee and for explaining the source of cash deposits. Therefore, CIT(A) was wrongly sustained the addition made by the AO. 10. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. submitted

SHRI HARSHADBHAI VALLABHBHAI PATEL,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, VALSAD

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.194/Srt/2017 & 356/Srt/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 & 2010-11 Shri Harshadbhai Vallabhai V. Income Tax Officer, Patel , Ward- 3, Valsad At & Post Tighra, Nava Falia, Via- Dungari Valsad 393 375 Pan: [Afspp 8443 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Rajesh M. Upadhyay, Itp िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Mrs. Anupama Singla, Sr.D.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By 09.12.2019 सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 10.12.2019 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Am: 1. The Above Captioned Two Appeal By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Valsad [In Short “The Cit(A)”] Dated 06.09.2017 & 20.05.2019 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 143 (3) Read With Section 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward- -3, Valsad (In Short “The Ao”).

69 could be made. In the alternate, it was submitted that if agricultural income is considered of the family members, then the same may be treated as loan to the assessee and for explaining the source of cash deposits. Therefore, CIT(A) was wrongly sustained the addition made by the AO. 10. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. submitted

INCOME TAX OFFICER, SURAT vs. ILESH B PONKIA, 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)

section 69 of the Act. 6. On appeal, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition treating the transaction as genuine transaction. On further appeal before this Tribunal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the reassessment