ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

section 68 and thereupon, it was Assessing Officer who had to carry out investigation and demonstrate that those materials were not sufficient for discharging onus cast upon assessee - Held, yes - Whether since, Assessing Officer failed to carry out any inquiry for falsifying evidence submitted by assessee in support of its explanation, impugned addition made

HARISHKUMAR KHUSHALRAY BHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2) NOW WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Harishkumar Khushalray Bhatt Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) P/1, Chandragupta Apartment Vs. Ahmedabad. Nr. Gordhandas Patel Hospital Vastrapur Ahmedabad. Pan : Abspb 3786 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh L. Shah, Ar : Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

68 and section 69A without proper analysis. It was submitted that the additions resulted in double taxation of the same amounts, and the rejection of the books was not justified in the absence of any cogent discrepancy. The AR accordingly prayed for deletion of the additions and granting of relief as prayed. 7 15. The learned Departmental Representative (DR) opposed

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S.DHARMEN MARBLE & STONE, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 794/Ahd/2019 With C.O.No.171/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 D.C.I.T., M/S. Dharmen Marble & Stone, Central Circle-1(2), Vs. 16-B, Jadav Chamber, Ahmedabad. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aabfd5172B

TDS of Rs. 16,897/- credited from city union bank and Prism Cement, thus the corresponding income of Rs. 1,68,970 also remain unexplained and escaped assessment. Therefore, the AO initiated the proceedings under section

ANKIT VIJAYKUMAR JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 are not Ankit Vijaykumar Jain vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2– applicable and when, the sources of cash deposits in bank account were fully explained and verified from audited accounts and also, from evidences of sales and ledger accounts as well as bank statements furnished to both the lower authorities. It be so held now and addition

ITO WARD-4(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. VALLEY COMTRADE PVT LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS JHAWAR COMTRADE PVT. LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2034/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 I.T.O, M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., Ward-4(1)(4), Vs. (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Ahmedabad. Pvt. Ltd.,) C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 68/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Vs. Ward-1(1)(3), Pvt. Ltd.,) Surat. C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N

68 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT-A. 6. The assessee besides reiterating its submission made during assessment proceeding further filed the assessment order of the investor companies framed under section 143(3) of the Act in the case of M/s. Divya

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has after appreciation of evidence placed on record by the assessee ITA Nos. 45to47/Ahd/2025 & 266&267/Ahd/2025 Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF vs. ITO ITO vs. Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF Asst. Years –2014-15 to 2016-17 - 18– during the course of appeal proceedings has deleted

INCOME TAX WARD 4(2)(3) AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL HUF, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has after appreciation of evidence placed on record by the assessee ITA Nos. 45to47/Ahd/2025 & 266&267/Ahd/2025 Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF vs. ITO ITO vs. Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF Asst. Years –2014-15 to 2016-17 - 18– during the course of appeal proceedings has deleted

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has after appreciation of evidence placed on record by the assessee ITA Nos. 45to47/Ahd/2025 & 266&267/Ahd/2025 Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF vs. ITO ITO vs. Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF Asst. Years –2014-15 to 2016-17 - 18– during the course of appeal proceedings has deleted

NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL, HUF,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has after appreciation of evidence placed on record by the assessee ITA Nos. 45to47/Ahd/2025 & 266&267/Ahd/2025 Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF vs. ITO ITO vs. Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF Asst. Years –2014-15 to 2016-17 - 18– during the course of appeal proceedings has deleted

INCOME TAX WARD 4(2)(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. NIKULBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL HUF, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 68 of the Act, we are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has after appreciation of evidence placed on record by the assessee ITA Nos. 45to47/Ahd/2025 & 266&267/Ahd/2025 Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF vs. ITO ITO vs. Nikulbhai Chaturbhai Patel-HUF Asst. Years –2014-15 to 2016-17 - 18– during the course of appeal proceedings has deleted

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI. SURESHCHANDRA SHANTILAL BRAHMBHATT, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Shri. Sureshchandra Shantilal Ward-1(2)(4), Ahmedabad, Brahmbhatt, Room No. 220, V. 4 Shreenath Bangalow Part-2 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Matrushree Party Plot, Near Sachin Tower, Vejalpur, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad-380005 Ahmedabad-380051, Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Actpb8904H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Tushar Hemani, Sr. Ar & Sh. Parimalsinh Parmar, Ar Revenue By: Sh. Prasad Rao Waghe Annasaheb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.04.2024

68 of the I.T. Act by not considering the facts mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. 2. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed return of income

SHREE SARAS SPICES & FOODS P. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 478/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Shree Saras Spices & Foods Pvt. I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-4(1)(3), A/3, 4Th Floor, Ahmedabad. Casela Tower,, Opp. Iscon Mandir, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad-380015

TDS. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal. 3. The first issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,44,07,768/- made by the AO under section 68

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SARAS SPICES & FOOD PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 478/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Shree Saras Spices & Foods Pvt. I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-4(1)(3), A/3, 4Th Floor, Ahmedabad. Casela Tower,, Opp. Iscon Mandir, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad-380015

TDS. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal. 3. The first issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,44,07,768/- made by the AO under section 68

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

section 68 apply only to credits found in the\nbooks during the relevant previous year and not to brought forward\nbalances. The assessee further relied on the confirmations, bank statements,\nand income-tax returns of the creditor, and submitted that the interest\npayment had been made through banking channels after deduction of TDS

AKAR LAMINATORS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1) (ASSTT. ORDER PASSING AUTHORITY) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1) (CURRENT JURISDICTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case, a public company, is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading, and job work of flexible packing materials. The assessee for the year under consideration was selected under scrutiny assessment under CASS and the assessment under section 144 of the Act was made

AKAR LAMINATORS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1) (ASTT. ORDER PASSSING AUTHORITY) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1) (CURRENT JURISDICTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case, a public company, is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading, and job work of flexible packing materials. The assessee for the year under consideration was selected under scrutiny assessment under CASS and the assessment under section 144 of the Act was made

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

section 68 apply only to credits found in the\nbooks during the relevant previous year and not to brought forward\nbalances. The assessee further relied on the confirmations, bank statements,\nand income-tax returns of the creditor, and submitted that the interest\npayment had been made through banking channels after deduction of TDS

PROLIFE INDUSTRIES LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

TDS under Section 194-I to the parties concerned. Further, the Assessee during the reassessment proceedings has filed confirmation of accounts, ITRs of the unsecured creditors with bank statements, ledger accounts, etc. However, the lower authorities have not accepted the unsecured loans, holding the same as not genuine, thereby making addition of the unsecured loans as well as the interest