PALAK DESIGNER DIAMOND JEWELLERY,MAHIDHARPURA, SURAT vs. LD. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

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

147. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Raymond Woolen Mills vs. ITO (236 ITR 34) held that: “3. In this case, we do not have to give a final decision as to whether there is suppression of material facts by the assessee or not. We have only to see whether there was prima facie some material

PALAK DESIGNER DIAMOND JEWELLERY,MAHIDHARPURA, SURAT vs. LD. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

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

147. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Raymond Woolen Mills vs. ITO (236 ITR 34) held that: “3. In this case, we do not have to give a final decision as to whether there is suppression of material facts by the assessee or not. We have only to see whether there was prima facie some material

USMAN VALI PATEL,BHARUCH GUJARAT vs. WARD 1(2), INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.183/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Usman Vali Patel, Vs. Ito, A-14 Assd Park, Near Khwaja Ward – 1(2), Township, Bharuch - 392001 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aykpp8165B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Krutarth Desai, Ar Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/11/2025

reassessment deserves to be quashed and set aside. 2. The learned Assessing Officer has not complied with the mandatory requirements of section 143(2) and passed the order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 which is bad in law and therefore impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside in the best interest of justice. ITA No.183/SRT/2025/AY.2011-12 Usman Vali

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

260/-. Subsequently, a search\nand seizure action was conducted u/s. 132 of the Act in case of Kuberji Group\non 06.02.2020. The residential premises of Shri Naresh Bisheshwarlal Agrawal\n(assessee herein) was also covered during the search and seizure operation.\nVarious incriminating documents were found and seized, which indicated that\nthe assessee had not disclosed his true and correct

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

u/s.\n132 of the Act in case of Kuberji Group on 06.02.2020. The residential premises\nof the assessee, Shri Naresh Bisheshwarlal Agrawal, was also covered during the\nsearch and seizure operation. Various incriminating documents were found and\nseized which indicated that the assessee had not disclosed his true and correct\nincome in the return of income. The assessee was issued