VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

forward losses. As such, considering the magnitude of the business of the assessee, the loss in dispute is miniscule and no prudent person will enter into such bogus transactions. 9.4 It was alleged by the revenue that the assessee has carried out the transactions in the script of M/s Prraneta Industries in connivance with SCS. The basis for holding

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

forward losses. As such, considering the magnitude of the business of the assessee, the loss in dispute is miniscule and no prudent person will enter into such bogus transactions. 9.4 It was alleged by the revenue that the assessee has carried out the transactions in the script of M/s Prraneta Industries in connivance with SCS. The basis for holding

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

forward losses. As such, considering the magnitude of the business of the assessee, the loss in dispute is miniscule and no prudent person will enter into such bogus transactions. 9.4 It was alleged by the revenue that the assessee has carried out the transactions in the script of M/s Prraneta Industries in connivance with SCS. The basis for holding

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENT. CIR. 1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

forward losses. As such, considering the magnitude of the business of the assessee, the loss in dispute is miniscule and no prudent person will enter into such bogus transactions. 9.4 It was alleged by the revenue that the assessee has carried out the transactions in the script of M/s Prraneta Industries in connivance with SCS. The basis for holding

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CHAMPALAL GOPIRAM AGARWAL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

carried forward loss stating that this was a penny stock. The appellant has filed documents before A.O vide letter dtd.05/12/2019 as under i) Chart of purchases and sales of shares. ii) Bills of purchases and sales of shares. iii) Copy of Denial account of JM financial showing opening balance of 340084 shares of Vax Housing. iv) Payment was done through

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

loss account to prove their genuineness. 9. Ld. D.R. thereafter pointed out that in appellate proceedings, the assessee filed additional evidences by way of copies of bills issued by the said parties to the assessee and their confirmations, as also copies of receipts issued by recipient of the gifts articles purchased as sales promotion expenses. He pointed out that

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

loss account to prove their genuineness. 9. Ld. D.R. thereafter pointed out that in appellate proceedings, the assessee filed additional evidences by way of copies of bills issued by the said parties to the assessee and their confirmations, as also copies of receipts issued by recipient of the gifts articles purchased as sales promotion expenses. He pointed out that

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

loss account to prove their genuineness. 9. Ld. D.R. thereafter pointed out that in appellate proceedings, the assessee filed additional evidences by way of copies of bills issued by the said parties to the assessee and their confirmations, as also copies of receipts issued by recipient of the gifts articles purchased as sales promotion expenses. He pointed out that

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3)AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Forwarding Contract Regulation Act 1952) and that various members and brokers had entered into transactions fraudulently and had helped various beneficiaries to book profits and losses to suit the requirements of those beneficiaries. The appellant having misused and allowed its clients to misuse the NMCE platform, having abetted in booking the losses by/for the clients by such illegal/irregular transactions cannot

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Forwarding Contract Regulation Act 1952) and that various members and brokers had entered into transactions fraudulently and had helped various beneficiaries to book profits and losses to suit the requirements of those beneficiaries. The appellant having misused and allowed its clients to misuse the NMCE platform, having abetted in booking the losses by/for the clients by such illegal/irregular transactions cannot

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Forwarding Contract Regulation Act 1952) and that various members and brokers had entered into transactions fraudulently and had helped various beneficiaries to book profits and losses to suit the requirements of those beneficiaries. The appellant having misused and allowed its clients to misuse the NMCE platform, having abetted in booking the losses by/for the clients by such illegal/irregular transactions cannot

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Forwarding Contract Regulation Act 1952) and that various members and brokers had entered into transactions fraudulently and had helped various beneficiaries to book profits and losses to suit the requirements of those beneficiaries. The appellant having misused and allowed its clients to misuse the NMCE platform, having abetted in booking the losses by/for the clients by such illegal/irregular transactions cannot

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Forwarding Contract Regulation Act 1952) and that various members and brokers had entered into transactions fraudulently and had helped various beneficiaries to book profits and losses to suit the requirements of those beneficiaries. The appellant having misused and allowed its clients to misuse the NMCE platform, having abetted in booking the losses by/for the clients by such illegal/irregular transactions cannot

FURNISH HOME,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1) OLD WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

carry forward of loss would be permitted under Chapter VI of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for having confirmed the addition made u/s.68 of the Act on account of cash deposits amounting to Rs.6,96,360/- raising following grounds

INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FURNISH HOME, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), wherein detailed submissions supported by the books of accounts, statutory returns, confirmation and other documentary evidences were filed. A remand report of the AO was sought on the same by the Ld. CIT(A) after considering which, Ld. CIT(A) deleted

carry forward of loss would be permitted under Chapter VI of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for having confirmed the addition made u/s.68 of the Act on account of cash deposits amounting to Rs.6,96,360/- raising following grounds

THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. SHUBH CONSTRUCTION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

loss of Rs. - 8,85,078/- was filed on 24th August, 2012. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s. 143(2) of the act on 8th August, 2013. The assessee firm is engaged in the business of civil contractor for construction of industry. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessing officer noticed that assessee

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ASHOKKUMAR MOHANLAL JAIN,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1207/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Ashok Mohanlal Jain, I.T.O, Prop Of Parshwanth Enterprise, Vs. Ward-1(3)(1), S/3, Sujata Flats, Ahmedabad. Camp Road, Sahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004. Pan: Aczpj7617B

carried forwarded from earlier year and during the year under consideration further purchases of Rs. 31,36,490/- was made by the assessee which resulted in total credit balance of Rs. 37,40,240/- at the end of the year under consideration. Thus, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition to the extent of Rs. 6,03,750/- only. However

SHRI ASHOK MOHANLAL JAIN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1207/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Ashok Mohanlal Jain, I.T.O, Prop Of Parshwanth Enterprise, Vs. Ward-1(3)(1), S/3, Sujata Flats, Ahmedabad. Camp Road, Sahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004. Pan: Aczpj7617B

carried forwarded from earlier year and during the year under consideration further purchases of Rs. 31,36,490/- was made by the assessee which resulted in total credit balance of Rs. 37,40,240/- at the end of the year under consideration. Thus, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition to the extent of Rs. 6,03,750/- only. However