BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

27 results for “section 68”+ Section 199(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi609Mumbai492Karnataka472Bangalore159Ahmedabad156Kolkata132Jaipur120Chennai110Chandigarh67Hyderabad59Calcutta52Raipur47Indore38Rajkot33Lucknow30Pune27Surat27Cuttack22Telangana20Nagpur16Jodhpur13Visakhapatnam9SC9Allahabad7Amritsar5Cochin5Ranchi4Agra4Rajasthan4Jabalpur2Patna2Guwahati2Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 26335Addition to Income24Section 143(3)23Section 153A18Section 143(2)10Section 1329Search & Seizure9Section 254(1)8Section 1478Section 153D

SEJAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.435/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V Ug-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, S. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqcs 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT-DR
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

Section 68 of the Act to prove the genuineness of cash credits received by the assessee. Before us the assessee-company has submitted in respect of each share applicants, the following details and documents to prove the Identity, Creditworthiness and Genuineness of Transactions, which are given below: (1) In respect of M/s Momentum Real Estate Pvt Ltd, the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

7
Disallowance5
Deduction3

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 131Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 68

section 68 of the Act by the AO. We further observed that the ld. CIT (A) has examined each and 19. every creditors/ lenders and given his factual findings of enquiry DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat Vs. Kejriwal Industries Ltd.,/ITA No.1509/AHD/2016 for A.Y. 2011-12 Page 38 of 49 report as well as facts of each lenders

SANDHYA DYES & CHEMICALS,,UMBERGAM vs. THE ADDL.CIT, VAPI RANGE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3225/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.3225/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Sandhya Dyes & Vs. The Additional Commissioner Chemicals, Of Income Tax, Plot No. 1703-B, Sarigam, Vapi Range, Vapi. Gidc, Umbergaon, Gujarat. [Pan: Aalfs 5832 K] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 41(1)

section 2(22)(e) of the Act are not attracted. In support of his contention with the deposits received by the assessee cannot be brought to tax a deemed dividend. The learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance in the case of Sharda Talkies vs. Smt. Madhu Latha Vyas AIR 1966 MP 68. The learned counsel

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, SURAT vs. SHRI MANISH KASHIRAM PATEL,, SURAT

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

ITA 1481/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1359 & 1481/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shankarlal C. Shah, The Acit, Central Circle-4, Vs. 199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeups4161E The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Parimalsinh B. Parmar, and Shri Aaditya For Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) & Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AEUPS4161E The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABLPP5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Tushar P Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Parimalsinh B. Parmar, and Shri Aaditya Nemani

SHANKARLAL C SHAH,,SURAT vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

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

ITA 1359/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1359 & 1481/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shankarlal C. Shah, The Acit, Central Circle-4, Vs. 199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeups4161E The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Parimalsinh B. Parmar, and Shri Aaditya For Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) & Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

199-201, Vishal Nagar Society, Surat. Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AEUPS4161E The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Vs. Manish Kashiram Patel, Surat. 15-16, Vanita Residency, Althan Canal Road, Althan, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABLPP5085E (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Tushar P Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Parimalsinh B. Parmar, and Shri Aaditya Nemani

MANOJJ GANESHLAL BHATIA, SURAT vs. ACIT, CIR 1(3), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 494/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.494/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Manojj Ganeshlal Bhatia Income-Tax, Circle-1[3], Room B-703, Opera House Building, Vs. 3Rd No.301, Floor, Anavil Nr. Agarsen Bhavan, City Light Business Centre, Adajan-Hazira Road, Surat-395007 Road, Adajan, Surat-395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacpb 9748 E (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul K.Patel, Advocate राज" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [Ld. Cit(A) For Short] Dated 28.08.2019 Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Dated 29.12.2017. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “1) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.3,97,77,965/- Made On Account Of Profit From Future & Options Ignoring That Assessee Has Failed To Tender Evidence & Explanation In This Regard? 2) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,60,54,528/- Made On Account Of Unexplained Increase In Capital Holding That The Capital Accumulation Is Fully Explained On The Basis Of Capital In The Itr Of A.Y 2011-12 & Accumulated Income In The Roi For A.Y 2012-13 To A.Y 2014-15 Ignoring That Assessee Has Shown Nil Capital Balance In Itr Filed For A.Y 2014-15?

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K.Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”] dated 29.12.2017. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as follows: “1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.3,97,77,965/- made on account

SHRI JIVRAJBHAI H. BALAR,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08, ( IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 1245/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.150 To 154/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2004-05 To 2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1245/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-1, 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) & Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153C

68,80,493/- was disallowed by the assessing officer. 16. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) adjudicated the issue relating to validity of assessment under section 153C of the Act, observing as follows: Apparently, the 1st ground in the original grounds

SHRI SUDEEP MAHENDRABHAI SHAH,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD1(3)(5),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2423/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 132(4)Section 143Section 147Section 148

68 on account of loans received by the assessee. The ld. Sr. DR further submitted that it would be seen whether there was prima-facie material to form belief as held by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC), the Hon`ble Supreme Court held that

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, SURAT vs. M/S. TRANSIT GEO SYSTEMS INTEGRATORS PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3330/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3330/Ahd/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) D.C.I.T., Circle-2(1)(1), M/S Transit Geo Systems Integrator Pvt. Ltd., 13-C-404, 1St Floor, Room No.223, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Parshvanath Complex, Above Bhakti Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Automobiles, Udhna, Magdalla Road, Surat-395017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadct 4158 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra– CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)

199),vii) Registration documents of P. Tax Act &VAT Act (pb 200-202) and viii) Statement recorded u/s 131 (pb pages 203-204). 11. By submitting these plethora documents and evidences, the assessee-company claims that it has satisfied the three ingredients of section 68 of the Act, namely, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness. In addition to this

SHRI GHANSHYAM DUNGARBHAI SUTARIYA,,SURAT vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-8,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2971/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ghanshyam Dungarbhai Sutaria, Vs. Acit, Circle-8, H.No. 1, 1St Floor, Sahaj Park Row Surat House, Hira Baug Circle, Vallabhacharya Road, Near Kailashdham Society, Ashwanikumar Road, Surat-395008 (Pan: Akkpp9318E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

2,06,000/- only. No other details such as balance sheet, bank statement etc were filed to substantiate his claim. In absence of any evidence, the amount of Rs. 14,85,000/- claimed to have been received from his wife Rasilaben, was considered as from undisclosed sources and was added to the income of the assessee. In addition to this

SHRI MURLIMANOHAR RAMKISHAN MUNDHRA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 158/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.158/Srt/2023 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Murlimanohar Ramkishan Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), (Old Ward- Mundhra, 301 To 308, Vs 1(2)(3) Surat, Aayakar Third Floor, Shree Krishna Market, Near Metro Tower, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat-395001 Pan No: Aflpm 6057 P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sudhir Surana, Ca & Shri Om Prakash Soni, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal Instituted On 03.03.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 18.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Ld. Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 13.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.11.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:- Murllimanohar R Mundhra “1. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts Confirming The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated By The Ld. Ao, Without Properly Appreciating The Submission Of The Appellant.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 57

68,140/- for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 23.03.2016 at Rs.5,17,750/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer on perusal of record found that assessee has shown interest received of Rs. 20,773/- under the head “income from other sources” against which, the amount of Rs.6,49,951/- was claimed

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 65/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 64/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 67/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 69/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 70/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

SURESHBHAI BALUBHAI ASODARIYA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 66/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

199 (Allahabad-Trib). 10. On the various other legal and factual contention that when the Assessing Officer has taken reasonable and plausible view after considering the material available on record, the assessment order cannot be branded as erroneous or where two views are possible and the Assessing officer has adopted one of the possible view, the assessment order cannot

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, SURAT vs. M/S. M.D. INFRA DEVELOPERS,, SURAT

In the result, Assessee’s appeal, in ITA No

ITA 3094/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3058 To 3059/Ahd/2016 & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3085/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S. M. D. Infra Developers, Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-2, 128, Mamta Park Society, Kapodra, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aasfm7357A (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3093 To 3094/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. M/S. M. D. Infra Developers, Surat. 128, Mamta Park Society, Kapodra, Varachha Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aasfm7357A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mitish S. Modi, C.A & Shri Akshay Modi, Ca Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 25/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Captioned Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 69B

199,200 Rs. 3538500 3568500 22474500 12 lacs 1783500 47029500 3567000 Details of payment Details of payment Details of payment Details Detail" of Details of Details of of payment payment payment payment 6 lacs 24.3.2011 10 lacs 15.2.2012 Cash Rs 6102 Rs. 51000 cash Cash Rs. 51000 Cash Rs.111000 Cash

M/S. M.D.INFRA DEVELOPERS,,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

In the result, Assessee’s appeal, in ITA No

ITA 3059/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3058 To 3059/Ahd/2016 & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3085/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S. M. D. Infra Developers, Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-2, 128, Mamta Park Society, Kapodra, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aasfm7357A (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3093 To 3094/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. M/S. M. D. Infra Developers, Surat. 128, Mamta Park Society, Kapodra, Varachha Road, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aasfm7357A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mitish S. Modi, C.A & Shri Akshay Modi, Ca Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 25/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Captioned Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 69B

199,200 Rs. 3538500 3568500 22474500 12 lacs 1783500 47029500 3567000 Details of payment Details of payment Details of payment Details Detail" of Details of Details of of payment payment payment payment 6 lacs 24.3.2011 10 lacs 15.2.2012 Cash Rs 6102 Rs. 51000 cash Cash Rs. 51000 Cash Rs.111000 Cash