DHIRUBHAI NANJIBHAI KACHCHADIA,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Dhirubhai Nanjibhai Kachchadia, I.T.O. Ward-2, B-9/83, Near Ambaji Temple, Vapi. Vs. Haria Hospital Road, Gidc, Vapi (Gujarat)-396395. Pan No. Acppk 1953 R Appellant/ Respondent Respondent/ Assessee

u/s 50C(2) of the act, especially, when the appellant has claimed lesser sale proceed as compared to the value fixed by SVO. Further, Ld CIT(A) has also erred in not allowing time to file valuation report of RVO before him in first appellate proceeding.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is individual, filed

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:

short term capital gain. Therefore, there can be no protective assessment. Thirdly, there has been a demand (without any limitation that it should not have been recovered) raised pursuant to the above assessment which also shows that the said assessment is not a protective assessment.” 14. In the present case, from the reasons recorded by the AO as reproduced hereinabove

RAMBILASH RAJARAM JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed

u/s 133(6) was issued to the assessee asking him to furnish the\ndetails of capital gain for the share transaction. However, no reply has been furnished by the\nassessee. On verification of the computation of income, it is seen that the assessee has not declared\nany capital gain and also noticed that claimed exemption

SUNITA JAJOO,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 552/Srt/2024 (Ay 2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Rambilash Rajaram Jajoo Income Tax Officer, Ward- 429-432, Golden Point, Falsawadi, 2(2)(4), Aaykar Bhawan, Majura बनाम Ring Road, Surat City, Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Vs Surat-395 002 Surat-395 001 [Pan : Aampj 0040 K] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

term capital gains (LTCG in short) were disallowed by the lower authorities in case of Damodar Jajoo and Jasodadevi Raja ram Jajoo, on first appeal, the additions/ disallowances were upheld, however on further appeal before this Tribunal, those assessee was allowed full relief vide order dated 09.12.2022 in ITA No. 183 to 185/Srt/2022. Against the decision of this Tribunal dated

JASODADEVI RAJARAM JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WD.-2(2)(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

u/s 147 of the Act, the submission and the various decisions of the Courts including those relied upon by the ld Counsel for the assessee. Before we proceed to adjudicate the issue relating to validity of reassessment proceedings, we would like to examine the reasons recorded by the assessing officer, which is reproduced below: 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar

DAMODAR JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD.2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

u/s 147 of the Act, the submission and the various decisions of the Courts including those relied upon by the ld Counsel for the assessee. Before we proceed to adjudicate the issue relating to validity of reassessment proceedings, we would like to examine the reasons recorded by the assessing officer, which is reproduced below: 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar

DAMODAR JAJOO,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD.2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

u/s 147 of the Act, the submission and the various decisions of the Courts including those relied upon by the ld Counsel for the assessee. Before we proceed to adjudicate the issue relating to validity of reassessment proceedings, we would like to examine the reasons recorded by the assessing officer, which is reproduced below: 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar

ARCHANA PRANAV DESAI,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, VAPI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.557/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Pranav Dolatrai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Desai Bunglow, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2160R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.558/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Archana Pranav Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Pranav Bunglos, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2161Q (Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 557 & 558/SRT/2019/AYs.2010-11 Pranav D. Desai & Archana P. Desai 2. First, we shall take assessee`s appeal in ITA No.557/SRT/2019 for assessment year 2010-11, wherein the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well

PRANAV D. DESAI,SURAT vs. ITO VAPI WARD, 7 VAPI, VAPI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.557/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Pranav Dolatrai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Desai Bunglow, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2160R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.558/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Archana Pranav Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Pranav Bunglos, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2161Q (Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 557 & 558/SRT/2019/AYs.2010-11 Pranav D. Desai & Archana P. Desai 2. First, we shall take assessee`s appeal in ITA No.557/SRT/2019 for assessment year 2010-11, wherein the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well

REKHABEN JITENDRAKUMAR JAIN,AHURA NAGAR SOCIETY vs. PCIT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year : 2013-14 Rekhaben Jitendrakumar Jain, The Pr.Commissioner Of 255-257, Ahura Nagar Society Vs Income Tax-1 Adajan. Surat. Pan : Adypj 6066 G (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca : Shri Ashish Pophara, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg

short “the AO”) under section 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Pr. CIT has erred in passing the order u/s. 263 by invoking Explanation

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)

short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the 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 TAX OFFICER 331, MAJURA GATE SURAT vs. SHARDABEN GORDHANBHAI ASODARIA, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

term capital gain (LTCG) on trading of penny scrip, namely, JRI Industries and\nInfrastructure Limited (in short, ‘JIIL’). The AO has mentioned that notice u/s 148\nwas issued to the assessee on 17.05.2021. Subsequently, following the directions\nof Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3005/2022, dated 04.05.2022, the\nAO informed the assessee that the above notice u/s 148 shall

URMILABEN THAKORDAS SOPARIWALA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Urmilaben Thakordas Ito Sopariwala, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. New Civil 8/743, Hanuman Char Rasta, Vs. Hospital Majuragate, Gopipura, Surat-395001. Surat-395001. Pan No. Aprps 5313 J Appellant Respondent

147 of the Income 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on t ‘the Act’) and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on t ‘the Act’) and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2018. The reassessment was completed on 14.12.2019 31.03.2018. The reassessment was completed on 14.12.2019 31.03.2018. The reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(3)(1), SURAT vs. HITESH B PONKIA HUF, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

term capital gain (LTCG) on trading of penny scrip, namely, JRI Industries and\nInfrastructure Limited (in short, ‘JIIL’). The AO has mentioned that notice u/s 148\nwas issued to the assessee on 17.05.2021. Subsequently, following the directions\nof Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3005/2022, dated 04.05.2022, the\nAO informed the assessee that the above notice u/s 148 shall

RUPAL DEVANG NAIK ,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD-4, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical\npurposes

short, ‘AO') invoked the provision of section 50C which\nstipulates that the fair market value (FMV) as valued by the stamp valuation\nauthority (SVA) should be taken for the purpose of section 48 of the Act.\nAccordingly, sale consideration in case of assessee for purpose of calculation of\nLTCG was taken at Rs.11,76,020/-. In absence of any submission

DINESHBHAI MULACHANDABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1371/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(1), बनाम/ Patel Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Vs. Patidar Faliyu, Bhestan Gam, Gate, Surat-395 001 Choryasi, Surat- 395 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bispp 4863 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri P.M. Jagasheth, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

term capital gain on sale of immovable property without calculating cost of purchase of property. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the Assessing Officer has erred in not referring to the DVO for determining

SHRIFAL IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

short, if there is a sale, then it is required to the presumed that there would be a corresponding purchase against such sale. In impugned case, there is a nexus of the accepted genuine sales with disputed purchases, thus the addition of entire disputed purchase of Rs.1,92,19,31,021/- would be seriously unjustified and utmost the real profits

SHRIFAL IMPEX PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

short, if there is a sale, then it is required to the presumed that there would be a corresponding purchase against such sale. In impugned case, there is a nexus of the accepted genuine sales with disputed purchases, thus the addition of entire disputed purchase of Rs.1,92,19,31,021/- would be seriously unjustified and utmost the real profits

SHRIFAL IMPEX PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

short, if there is a sale, then it is required to the presumed that there would be a corresponding purchase against such sale. In impugned case, there is a nexus of the accepted genuine sales with disputed purchases, thus the addition of entire disputed purchase of Rs.1,92,19,31,021/- would be seriously unjustified and utmost the real profits