PRANAV TRIVEDI

The assessee-company filed its return for A.Y. 2009-10, and assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 29.12.2011. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 was issued on 09.03.2015, beyond four years, recording two reasons: (i) wrong computation of disallowance under Section 14A, and (ii) alleged escapement of in…

The Commissioner of Income Tax‑I filed multiple tax appeals against Sunilkumar B. Handa. The department, through counsel, sought permission to withdraw these appeals because the tax effect in each case was below the minimum threshold specified in the CBDT circular dated 11 July 2018, which permits the department to pre…

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Revenue appealed against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s judgment which had reduced additions on alleged clandestine removal of goods to 1% of disclosed sales and directed deduction under Section 10B. The Assessing Officer had originally added income based on estimated gross profit and unexplained investments, …

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against Kamlesh Damjibhai Yadav in Tax Appeal No. 627 of 2007, which had been decided on only two of seven questions, leaving several issues unresolved. The appellant argued that a restraint order under Section 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued in the names of all fou…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II filed multiple tax appeals (Nos. 1027, 1028, 1116, 1993 of 2008) against Labh Construction & Industries Ltd. The appellant argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores. The learned Senior Standing Counsel relied on Circular No. 9 of 2024 dated 17‑09‑2024, which …

The petitioner, Dilip Patel, filed a return for AY 2019‑20 and was later subjected to a search where a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for a land sale at Rs 39.32 crore was seized. The Assessing Officer, relying on a Departmental Valuation Officer’s report, assessed the land value at Rs 28.50 crore and added Rs 8.25 …

The petitioner, Dilip Patel, filed a return for AY 2019‑20 and was later subjected to a search where a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for a land sale at Rs 39.32 crore was seized. The Assessing Officer, relying on a Departmental Valuation Officer’s report, assessed the land value at Rs 28.50 crore and added Rs 8.25 …

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against Gujarat State Energy Generation Ltd in two income‑tax appeals (Nos. 1972 of 2009 and 155 of 2010). The Court noted that both appeals involved a very low tax amount. Pursuant to Circular No. 17/2019 issued by the Ministry of Finance, the Court applied the monetary limits f…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) filed an appeal against Shri Shakti Charitable Trust, Rajkot. The High Court of Gujarat directed the appellant to submit a copy of the Memo of Appeal within one week. The Court warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the matter for non‑prosecution. No substan…

The Stainless Steel Pipes and Tubes Manufacturers Association and other petitioners filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court against the Union of India and other respondents. The petition sought relief (the specific relief is not detailed in the order). The petitioners, through counsel Amal Pares…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax filed an application seeking condonation of a 46‑day delay in filing a tax appeal. The respondent, M/s. Ankit Gold Limited, opposed the condonation, arguing that the delay should not be excused. Both parties were heard, and the court considered the application in the interest of…

M/s Ravi Plumbing and Construction failed to file its GST return for Q1 of FY 2024‑25, prompting a show‑cause notice and subsequent cancellation of its GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act. The petitioner did not respond to the notice and later filed an appeal under Section 107 after a six‑month dela…

The petitioner, M/s Shree Krishna Marketing, filed a special civil application before the Gujarat High Court. The respondent State of Gujarat filed an order dated 29.01.2026, which was taken on record. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the relief sought in the writ petition would be satisfied by the said order. C…

M/s Shreeji Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the disallowance of a Form‑C claim of Rs.92,30,891 by the First Appellate Authority, which was upheld by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal. The appellant argued that the negative report on which the disallowance was based was never furnished to it, violating natural j…

M/S U S Standard Ispat Pvt. Ltd. filed a tax appeal before the Gujarat High Court against the Dy. Commissioner of State Tax. The appellant’s counsel, Mr. J.F. Mehta, informed the Court that despite diligent efforts he could not locate or contact the appellant. The Court noted that the appellant could still approach the…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

Alstom Transport India Ltd. (ATIL) sought to quash the order allowing an appeal that set aside a refund sanction granted to its predecessor, Alstom Rail Transportation India Ltd. (ARTIPL), after ARTIPL’s amalgamation into ATIL. The dispute centered on whether ARTIPL, which had transferred only part of its unutilized in…

The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise filed a tax appeal against M/s Jalaaram Steel Furniture Pvt. Ltd. The appellant argued that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs.2 crores. The respondent contended that the appeal should be maintainable. The Court examined Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17 September 202…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II appealed against E Infochips Ltd concerning a tax liability. The appellant argued that the tax effect in the appeal was less than Rs.2 crore. The appellant relied on Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17 September 2024, which stipulates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs.2 crore are not …

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against Ms. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' senior standing counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs.2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of app…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against SMT. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of a…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against SMT. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of a…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against SMT. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of a…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against SMT. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of a…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against Ms. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' senior standing counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs.2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of app…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against Ms. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' senior standing counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs.2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of app…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against Ms. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' senior standing counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs.2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of app…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 appealed against SMT. Jashuben Rameshbhai Patel in multiple tax appeal matters. The appellants' Senior Standing Counsel, Mr. Karan Sanghani, argued that the tax effect in each appeal was less than Rs. 2 crores, invoking Circular No. 9 of 2024 which bars maintenance of a…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation and Transfer Pricing) appealed against SKAPS Industries India Pvt. Ltd. The appellant argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs.2 crores, invoking Circular No.9 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 which bars the maintenance of tax appeals where the ta…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

The petitions arose from notices issued under Section 148 of the Income‑Tax Act after searches were conducted under Section 132/132A. The petitioners argued that when material concerning a third‑person is obtained in a search, the assessing officer must first record satisfaction under Section 153C before invoking the g…

M/s PI Industries Ltd., the petitioner, filed a special civil application seeking permission to withdraw its writ petition on the ground that the cause of action no longer existed. The petitioner argued that the matter had become infructuous. The Court considered whether it could grant such permission. No substantive l…

Petitioner Abdul Saleem A filed a special civil application seeking to withdraw his writ petition and instead pursue an appeal before the appellate authority, requesting that the appeal be filed within one week and disposed of within twelve weeks. The Court considered the petitioner's request and clarified that withdra…