R AND R INFRASPACE PRIVATE LIMITED,NA vs. ARIVS.PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VALSAD, VALSAD

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 532/Srt/2024 (Ay 2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) R & R Infraspace Pvt. Ltd. Principal Commissioner Of Income- Office No.A1, Giriraj Cinema Tax, Valsad, 301, 3Rd Floor, Palak बनाम Compound, Navsari-396 445 Arcade, Shantinagar, Tithal Road, Vs [Pan : Aafcr 1504 C] Valsad-396 001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 25.03.2023 for assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Hon’ble PCIT ought to have waited till the appeal of the assessee before Hon’ble CIT(A) could be disposed off. An order passed u/s 263 without taking cognizance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN WARD,, DAMAN vs. GEWINNER TRADEX PVT. LTD., DAMAN & DIU

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.264/Srt/2022 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Income Tax Officer, Gewinner Tradex Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Flat No.12 Survey Ward-Daman, Vs No.338/8 & 668/09, Somnath Kachigam Road Dabhel Daman-396210 Pan No. Aagcg 5384 C ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on 11.09.2021. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A)-NFAC has erred in deleting the addition of Gewinner Tradex Pvt. Ltd. Rs.73,98,85,739/- without considering the finding

ANUJ SATISHKUMAR BANSAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Mmber आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1267/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Anuj Satishkumar Bansal, Vs. Ito, 302, Shri Hari Appartment, Piplod Ward – 1(3)(1), Road Near Lancer Army School, Surat Surat 395007, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bwxpb3655C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025

144B of the Act and assessed the total income at Rs.1,68,46,550/-. He made additions of Rs.1,42,38,500/- u/s 69A of the Act towards the credits in the bank account and Rs.7,97,000/- u/s 69A, being cash deposit in the bank account and levied tax at the enhanced rate u/s 115BBE

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

68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order of the AO, the assessee went in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 4. Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee challenged the assessment on two counts (i) validity of reopening of the assessment by issuance of notice under section 148 in view of the decision of the Union of India

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

68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order of the AO, the assessee went in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 4. Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee challenged the assessment on two counts (i) validity of reopening of the assessment by issuance of notice under section 148 in view of the decision of the Union of India

SUNIL KUMAR MEHTA,DARIAPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.265/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sunik Kumar Mehta बनाम/ Ito, A – 24, Asthvinayak Complex, Vs. Ward- 2(2)(1), Dariapur, Ahmedabad - 380004 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Allpm1108P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Chirag Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 28.01.2025 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [in short, “CIT(A)”] for assessment year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The assessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of Income

ALPESH UMESHCHANDRA,SURAT vs. ITO WARD-1(2) (1), SURAT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

144B of the Act after making addition of Rs. 1,56,00,753/- treating the said amount as unexplained credits under Section 68

GAUTAM PRAVINCHANDRA SHETH HUF,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.343 & 344/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Kanchanben Pravinbhai Sheth Vs. Pcit - 1, Surat 3/A, 1 St Floor, Royal Vila Apts., Surat Ghoddod Road, Surat (Jao: Ito, Ward – 1(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adops2971D (Appellant) (Respondent) Gautam Pravinbhai Sheth (Huf) Vs. Pcit - 1, 3/A, 1 St Floor, Royal Vila Apts., Surat Ghoddod Road, Surat (Jao: Ito, Ward – 1(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafhg1435A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2025

144B of the Income tax Act was passed by the AO on 18.03.2023. 6. Subsequently, on perusal of the case records, the Ld. PCIT observed that once it was established by the Investigation Wing, after analyzing the several incriminating documents, communications and digital data seized in the search operations, that the impugned scrip was penny in nature and same

SMT. KANCHANBEN PRAVINBHAI SHETH,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.343 & 344/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2018-19) Kanchanben Pravinbhai Sheth Vs. Pcit - 1, Surat 3/A, 1 St Floor, Royal Vila Apts., Surat Ghoddod Road, Surat (Jao: Ito, Ward – 1(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adops2971D (Appellant) (Respondent) Gautam Pravinbhai Sheth (Huf) Vs. Pcit - 1, 3/A, 1 St Floor, Royal Vila Apts., Surat Ghoddod Road, Surat (Jao: Ito, Ward – 1(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafhg1435A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2025

144B of the Income tax Act was passed by the AO on 18.03.2023. 6. Subsequently, on perusal of the case records, the Ld. PCIT observed that once it was established by the Investigation Wing, after analyzing the several incriminating documents, communications and digital data seized in the search operations, that the impugned scrip was penny in nature and same

VIJAY BHANDARI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-7, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.747/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Vijay Bhandari, Vs. Ito, Mataji Enterprises Shop No. Ug- National Faceless Assessment 17, Bhilad Plaza Shopping Centre Centre, Bhilad, Bhilad - 396105 Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajtpb2990E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act’) dated 01.12.2023 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2016-17, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B

SHREE SAI ALANG HOUSE,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.906/Srt/2024 (Ay 2022-23) (Physical Court Hearing) Shree Sai Alang House Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(1), 13-15, Khodal Chhaya Society, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, बनाम Surat Kamrej Road, Opp. Majura Gate, Vs Shyamdham Mandir, Surat-395 001 Surat-394 185 [Pan : Abefs 8896 D] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 22.03.2024. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. 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 action

BALVANT NANDLAL TALAVIYA,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD-1, NAVSARI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.530 & 531/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Balvant Nandlal Talaviya, Vs. The Ito, B-2/45, Sundaram Park Society, Hansot Ward – 1, Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch - 393001 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aedpt4075K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2025

68 of the Act. The AO determined the total income at Rs.1,36,67,473/- u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed this appeal before CIT(A). There was delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) issued various notices

BALVANT NANDLAL TALAVIYA,BHARUCH vs. ITO WARD-1, NAVSARI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.530 & 531/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Balvant Nandlal Talaviya, Vs. The Ito, B-2/45, Sundaram Park Society, Hansot Ward – 1, Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch - 393001 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aedpt4075K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2025

68 of the Act. The AO determined the total income at Rs.1,36,67,473/- u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed this appeal before CIT(A). There was delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) issued various notices

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. 7 STAR DREAMS, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1288/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of 7 Star Dreams बनाम/ Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1) 1001, World Trade Centre, Ring Vs. Surat, Room No.,612, Aayakar Road, Surat-395 002 Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabfz 2575 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 11/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/03/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 22.10.2024 by the CIT(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short ‘AO’) u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 r.w.s 144B

BALUBHAI KIKABHAI PATEL,VALSAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.461/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Balubhhai Kikabhai Patel Principal Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nahuli, Karmbele, Umbergon, Income-Tax, Valsad, Room No. Vs. Surat-396 105 301, 3Rd Floor, Palak Arcade, Shanti Nagar, Tithal Road, Valsad-396 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Akqpp 2563 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 13/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025

section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 15.03.2024 by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad, [in short, ‘PCIT’] which in turn assessment order passed by National-e Assessment Centre, Delhi/Assessing Officer for the assessment year (AY) 2018-19 on 21.04.2021. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under

KAMAKSHI DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED ,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.841/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Kamakshi Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ Office No.203, 2Nd Floor 1(1)(3), Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Vs. Panchratna Apartment, Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Dalgrya Sheri, Mahindrapura, Hospital, Surat-395 001 Surat-395 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaeck 0477 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By None राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 10/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/03/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 02.07.2024 by the CIT(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2018-19, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short ‘AO’) u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated

TIRUPATI SHYAM ENTERPRISE,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Tirupati Shyam Enterprise Nfac, Delhi Current F.P. No. 139 Orleaans, Near Jurisdiction: Dy. Cit Circle- Sosyo Circle Udhna Magadalla Vs. 1(1)(1), Road, Surat-395007. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001. Pan No. Aagft 3570 Q Appellant Respondent

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961. 5. It is therefore prayed that above assessment framed u/s. 5. It is therefore prayed that above assessment framed u/s. 5. It is therefore prayed that above assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B may kindly be quashed and/or the additions 147 r.w.s 144B may kindly be quashed and/or the additions 147 r.w.s

ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL CO. PVT LTD,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.541/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Engineering Professional Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit -1, 444, Royal Arcade, Opp. Sarthana Zoo, Surat Varachha Road, Near Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat – 395006, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabce0313Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/02/2025

section 263 of the Act and referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts in the cases of Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 243 ITR 83 (SC), CIT vs. Pavilee Projects Pvt. Ltd., 149 taxman.com 115 (SC), CIT vs. Nagesh Neatwears Pvt. Ltd., 345 ITR 135 (Delhi), ITO vs. D. G. Housing Projcts