Murlidhar Lahorimal v. CIT

CLAYMINE MICRONS LLP,WANKANER vs. PRINCIPAL CIT 1, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 216/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Claymine Microns Llp Vs. Pcit Survey No. 59 At Ratavirda, Nr. Capron Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Ceramic Sartanpar Road, Wankaner, Ring Road, Rajkot, Gujarat - Gujarat - 363641 360001 Pan/Gir No.: Aamfc4286C (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/03/2026

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 216/RJT/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Claymine Microns LLP Vs. PCIT Survey No. 59 at Ratavirda, Nr. Capron Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Ceramic Sartanpar Road, Wankaner, Ring Road, Rajkot, Gujarat - Gujarat - 363641 360001 PAN/GIR No.: AAMFC4286C (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Hardik Vora, AR राज" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16/02/2026…

KUNJAN JAGDISHCHANDRA SEDANI,JAMANGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.197/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Kunjan Jagdishchandra Sedani Principal Commissioner Of Vs. 18B, Parikunj, Mahavir Society, Income Tax, Jamnagar Room No. 101, 1St Floor Aayakar Bedi Bunder Road, Jamnagar- 361008 Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Jamnagar-361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Erips2050H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 23/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Dated 21.02.2025 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (In Short “Ld Pcit”), Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'), For The Assessment Year 2015- 16.Grievances Raised By The Assessee, Which, Being Interconnected, Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: 1. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit, Jamnagar Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Setting-Aside The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Even When The Order As Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Revenue. 2. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit, Jamnagar Erred In Law & In Facts By Setting-Aside The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, Kunjan Jagdishchandra Sedani

…, the repayment is made and accepted by the department no addition for such loan is to be made in the hands of the assessee. For that reliance can be placed on the following judgments of Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat, viz:(i)Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs CIT (280 ITR 512 Guj), and (ii)CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar 42 taxmann.com 251 Guj. The revisionary authority has not established or demonstrated how the assessment order, as framed, has resulted in any loss of revenue or incorrect allowance of a claim and as to how the order is “prejudicial to the interest of revenue”. We note that in compliance to various notic…

PARESH DAYASHANKAR MADEKA,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(3), RAJKOT

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

…aid alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans Whether any question of law arose from Tribunal's order - Held, on facts, no. iv. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd. [278 ITR 170 (Gu])] [2005] 149 Taxman 149 (GUJ.) Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Cash credits - Assessment year 1983-84- Assessee-co-operative society was engaged in business of banking - Assessing Officer made addition in assessee's hand as income from undisclosed sources on ground that there were various discrepancies in records maintained by assesse…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR - 1(3), SURAT vs. RAJGREEN INFRALINK LLP, SURAT

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.257 & 375/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink Llp Deputy Commissioner Of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Rajgreen Infralink Llp Vs Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Nagar, Nr. Choksi Wadi, Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, New Rander Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 Surat-395009 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

…following decisions;  CIT Vs Orrisa Corporation Pvt Limited (159 ITR78 SC),  CIT Vs Daulat Ram Rawatmal (87 ITR 349 SC),  DCIT Vs Rohini Builders (182 ITR CTR 373 Guj),  CIT Vs Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd (278 ITR 170 Guj),  Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs CIT (280 ITR 512 Guj),  CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar 42 taxmann.com 251 Guj. 13. So far as deletion of addition against payment to Rameshwaram Developers, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits that once the assessee ITA Nos. 257 & 375/SRT/2023 (A.Y 18-19) Rajgreen Infralink LLP has given advance for purchase land for developing project and furnished the register…

RAJGREEN INFRALINK LLP,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(3), SURAT

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.257 & 375/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink Llp Deputy Commissioner Of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Rajgreen Infralink Llp Vs Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Nagar, Nr. Choksi Wadi, Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, New Rander Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 Surat-395009 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

…following decisions;  CIT Vs Orrisa Corporation Pvt Limited (159 ITR78 SC),  CIT Vs Daulat Ram Rawatmal (87 ITR 349 SC),  DCIT Vs Rohini Builders (182 ITR CTR 373 Guj),  CIT Vs Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd (278 ITR 170 Guj),  Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs CIT (280 ITR 512 Guj),  CIT Vs Ayachi Chandrashekhar 42 taxmann.com 251 Guj. 13. So far as deletion of addition against payment to Rameshwaram Developers, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits that once the assessee ITA Nos. 257 & 375/SRT/2023 (A.Y 18-19) Rajgreen Infralink LLP has given advance for purchase land for developing project and furnished the register…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J B SYNTEX PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.140/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcj9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2023

…urt of Gujarat in favour of the assessee: (i) CIT v Orissa Corporation 159 ITR 78(SC) (ii) Daulatram Rawatmall 87 ITR 349(SC) (iii) Dhirajlal Giridharilal v CIT 26 ITR 736(SC) (iv) Murlidhar Lahorimal v CIT 280 ITR 170 (Guj) (v) CIT v Pragati Co-Op. Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170(Guj) We note that Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Ahmedabad, in the case of B. S. Corporation vs. ACIT (2001) 161 Taxman 29 wherein the Tribunal held that “if link is not established that the said amount belongs to the assessee or money is repaid to donor no addition can be made.” Jurisdictional Gujarat High Court in its decision in case of Dy. CIT v.…

SHRI CHANDUBHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI BORAD,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(5), SURAT

In the result, ground No.2 of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.143/Srt/2023 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Physical Court) Chandubhai Parshottambhai Income Tax Officer, Borad, 162, 163, Akshardham Ward-3(3)(5), Surat, Vs Society, Sarthana, Jakatnaka, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Varachha Road, Gate, Surat-395001 Surat-395006 Pan No: Ajfpb 2959 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

…AR for the assessee relied upon following case law:  CIT vs. Daulatram Rawat Mal (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC)  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P.) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC)  Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC)  Murlidhar Lahorimal vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 512 (Guj)  CIT vs. Pragati Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (2005) 278 ITR 170 (Guj) 9. On the addition of agricultural income as “income from other sources”, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits that Assessing Officer doubted the agricultural income on taking view that agricultural income in preceding assessment year was much less than agricultural income dec…

M/S. WHITE WILLOW,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(5), SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.370/Srt/2022 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S White Willow Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat, Vishram Apartment, Opp. Vs Anavil Business Centre, Sawlani Estate Bungalows, Pal Hazira Road, Adajan, Beside Trinidhi Apartment, Surat-395007 Ghod Dod Road, Regent Mall, Surat-395007 Pan No. Aabfw 4804 F ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

…evenue. The assessee was not required to prove source of source. To support such submission, Ld. Senior counsel for the assessee relied upon the following case law:  DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) 7 M/s White Willow  Murlidhar Lahorimal vs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj)  CIT vs. Pragati Co.Op. Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 (Guj)  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Lt. 159 ITR 78 (SC) 7. The learned Senior Counsel for the assessee further submits that assessing officer issued notice under section 133(6) to the lenders. Such notice was duly served upon lenders and lenders responded and furnished their reply. The Asse…