LAXMANJI KHODAJI SOLANKI (THAKOR),GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

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

249(4)\nof the Act ignoring fact that appellant has no taxable income\nand accordingly not liable for filing return of income.\n\n6. Ld. NFAC failed to pass order as per the provision of section\n250(6) of the Act and appellant prays that same may be set\naside to the file of CIT (A) / NFAC for readjudication

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

249/- to the international transaction entered by the assessee with its AE, HLPL and SIMPL. The upward adjustment proposed by the TPO are tabulated in his order as under: ITA No.2390/Ahd/2018 & 1783/Ahd/2019 with CO 6 10. The assessee objected to the proposed upward adjustment to the DRP, who noted that this issue was under consideration before the DRP consistently

SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B.V,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while the CO filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarwith Co No.20/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 1783/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shell Global Solutions International B.V.,, Acit, International C/O. Bsr Associates & Llp Vs Taxation-1 903, Commerce House V Ahmedabad. Nr.Vodafone House Prahaladnagar Corporation Road, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaics 3589 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2024 & 06/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/12/2024

249/- to the international transaction entered by the assessee with its AE, HLPL and SIMPL. The upward adjustment proposed by the TPO are tabulated in his order as under: ITA No.2390/Ahd/2018 & 1783/Ahd/2019 with CO 6 10. The assessee objected to the proposed upward adjustment to the DRP, who noted that this issue was under consideration before the DRP consistently

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,,WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KANAK CASTOR PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedasst.Year : 2008-09

b) of your letter Details of labour expenses for Rs.85,60,426/- alongwith name and address of Parties are enclosed marked Annexure-P 2. Copy of acknowledgement receipt of TDS returns (From No.26Q) for current Asst.Year 2008-09 are enclosed marked Annexure-Q. Labour charges of Rs.21,997/- and brokerage of Rs.4,26,170/- aggregating of Rs.4

MANSHA TEXTILES PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13 Mansha Textiles P. Ltd. The Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) 1, Vikram Society Vadodara. Gotri Road, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 0191 J (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

B)12 of the balance sheet recording discovery of fraud to the tune of Rs.230.65 lakhs spread over F.Ys. 2006-07 to 2011-12 and asserted that no rent had actually been received in the company’s hands, hence nothing was credited in the books. 3 2.4 To verify, the AO issued notices under section 133(6) to the alleged

RADHE FINSEC INDIA LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

TDS of Rs. 4,12,868/- was paid off 3. The Income Tax Officer, Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru issued an intimation u/s. 143(1) of the IT Act dated 15.12.2014 to the company, wherein they doubly counted the income under the normal provisions of the Act at Rs 64,59 670/- and calculated the total amount of tax liability upon

VIJAYBHAI DASHRATHBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us: -

4. Being aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming penalty of Rs. 10,72,242/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee was under a bonafide I.T.A No. 2622/Ahd/2017

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand 24,218,26 7,808,150 35,584,298 37,920,270 63,851,979 6,241,250 15,744,81 16,897,42 208,266,439 Total 0 2 1 10.9 However, we find that the assessee has not demonstrated

TARPAWANKUMAR RAMPRASAD SANDHIR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

249, Bhavanpura Pith, Ahmedabad Opp. Raipur Gate, Ahmedabad-380001 PAN : ACVPS 7030 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Written submission on record Revenue by : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 18/04/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 22/04/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This

ITO(E),VADODARA, RACE CIURSE VADODARA vs. TAKSHSHILA FOUNDATION(NGO), KARELIBAUGH, VADODARA

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member & Co No.8/Ahd/2024 (In Ita No.118/Ahd/2024 – By Assessee) Assessment Year : 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer (E) Takshshila Foundation (Ngo) (Ward) Vs B/15, Suhas Society Race Course Harni Road Vadodara 390 007 Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaatt 5363 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent & Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Arises From The Order Of The Office Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A)–6, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 08-12-2023, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23 Against The Intimation/Order Passed U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) By Cpc, Bengaluru & The Assessee Is In Cross Objection Thereof.

TDS of Rs. 7,444/-. 2.2. The CPC, Bengaluru disallowed the claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act concluding that the assessee failed to e-file the Audit Report in form 10B one month prior to the due date of filing the return u/s.139(1) of the Act. The assessee filed rectification application u/s.154 of the Act against order/ intimation

M/S. NEPTUNE ESTATE,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

B, Sahjanand Kutir & Laghu, Circle-1(2), Udhyog Vashahat, Opp. Mani Vadodara Nagar, Old Padra, Road, Vadodara-490020 [PAN No.AAJFN6716D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 12.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement 21.12.2022 O R D E R The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed

REKHABEN INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

b) URD Jewellery/Bullion purchased from Shri Indravadan J Choksi (2.3 crores) – This jewellery was claimed to have been received by Shri Indravadan J Chokshi from M/s. Arihant Designer Jeweller Pvt. Ltd. and thereafter sold by Shri Indravadan J Choksi to his wife Ms. Rekha Chokshi that is the assessee and (c) URD purchases ( purchases from unregistered dealers) Rs. 3.60 cores

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. REKHA INDRAVADAN CHOKSHI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

b) URD Jewellery/Bullion purchased from Shri Indravadan J Choksi (2.3 crores) – This jewellery was claimed to have been received by Shri Indravadan J Chokshi from M/s. Arihant Designer Jeweller Pvt. Ltd. and thereafter sold by Shri Indravadan J Choksi to his wife Ms. Rekha Chokshi that is the assessee and (c) URD purchases ( purchases from unregistered dealers) Rs. 3.60 cores