THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. APPLITECH SOLUTION LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

purchased the computers from Rahul Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Vandan Computers Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Design Tech Computers and M/s. Soft Design was ITA Nos. 246 & 247/Ahd/2020 & CO Nos.74 & 75/Ahd/2020 Assessee : Applitech Solution Limited AYs : 1999-2000 & 2001-2002 3 held to be bogus and depreciation

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNIQUE METROPOILS,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

bogus purchases calculated at l2.5% of the Gross Profit when no such disallowance is called for. I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 3 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis Further Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the purchases were made from genuine parties. 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

M/S. UNIQUE METROPOLIS,,AHMEDABAD vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

bogus purchases calculated at l2.5% of the Gross Profit when no such disallowance is called for. I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 3 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis Further Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the purchases were made from genuine parties. 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

bogus. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have deleted addition made by AO on surmises & conjectures in toto. It be so held now. 3.Levy of interest u/s 234A/234B/234C & 234D of the Act is not justified. 4.Initiation of penalty u/s 271 (l)(c) of the Act is not justified. 2. Facts of the case are that assessee has shown receipt

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases

ACIT-3(1)(1), AMBAWADI vs. OMSHIV FABRICSHUB PVT. LTD., NAVRANGPURA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1098/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Asstt. Year: 2013-2014

purchases, bogus sales and bogus expenditure to accommodate the assessee. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) relied upon the order of the Hon’ble Settlement Commission which cannot be the sole criteria to restrict the disallowance. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in grey cloth on wholesale. The assessee

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all four appeals with regard to depreciation of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

bogus. There were receipts of purchases, transportation payments, gate passes and store receipts etc. which were properly maintained. Therefore, it was submitted that the depreciation

SHRI HAJI MOHMMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,BARODA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

bogus purchases) 4. During the course of assessment, the assessing officer has called detail of purchases exceeding Rs. 10 lacs per party made during the year under consideration. The assesse has supplied the aforesaid information. Thereafter, the assessing officer has asked the assesse to furnish the confirmation from the parties from whom the purchases exceeding Rs. 1 lacs were made

ASHAPURA STONE INDUSTRIES,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, ANAND

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.27/Ahd/2024 2. Ita No.28/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 (Respectively) Ashapura Stone Industries The Income Tax Officer Nh No.8, Nr. Geb Sub-Station Vs Ward-3 (Now Ward-1) Vasad – 388 306 (Gujarat) Anand Pan: Aaufa 6762 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Pertain To Different Assessment Years, But Involve Common Issues (Except Quantum In Appeal) & Hence Are Being Decided Together For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Appeals Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) - [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2012-13 & 2013-14, Both Dated 16/11/2023, Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed For Respective Assessment Years By Assessing Officer

depreciation of Rs.16,25,849/- claimed by the ITA Nos.27 & 28/Ahd/2024 Ashapura Stone Industries vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 assessee u/s.32 of the Act as the purchase of machinery was considered as bogus

ASHAPURA STONE INDUSTRIES,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, ANAND

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member 1. Ita No.27/Ahd/2024 2. Ita No.28/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 (Respectively) Ashapura Stone Industries The Income Tax Officer Nh No.8, Nr. Geb Sub-Station Vs Ward-3 (Now Ward-1) Vasad – 388 306 (Gujarat) Anand Pan: Aaufa 6762 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Pertain To Different Assessment Years, But Involve Common Issues (Except Quantum In Appeal) & Hence Are Being Decided Together For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Appeals Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) - [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2012-13 & 2013-14, Both Dated 16/11/2023, Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed For Respective Assessment Years By Assessing Officer

depreciation of Rs.16,25,849/- claimed by the ITA Nos.27 & 28/Ahd/2024 Ashapura Stone Industries vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 assessee u/s.32 of the Act as the purchase of machinery was considered as bogus

AZURE KNOWLEDGE CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

purchase of software was treated as bogus and the AO had disallowed the depreciation of Rs.71,25,000/- claimed thereon

M/S. FLOURISH PUREFOODS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-2(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. No.518/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Flourish Purefoods Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 11-12, Ecs House, Garden View, Tax, Nr. Global Hospital, Bodakdev, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad-380054 Ahmedabad [Pan No.Aadcv2683B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

depreciation of Rs. 18,92,228/- on capital assets purchased from J S Enterprise for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16. However, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that M/s J S Enterprise was not traceable, and there was no valid address for the company. Based on the Inspector's report, the AO observed that the Claris Group

M/S. HARSIDDH QUARRY WORKS,ARAVALLI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.103/Ahd/2022 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 M/S. Harsiddh Quarry Works, Principal Commissioner Of At Alva (Vatrak), Vs. Income Tax, Taluka Bayad, Ahmedabad. District Aravalli, Alva(Vaarak)-383325. Pan: Aaifh0303H

bogus purchase, then he could not make any other addition. This aspect has been settled by the series of judgments. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Pvt. Ltd. reported in 331 ITR 296 has held as under: The Shorter Oxford Dictionary defines the expression "also" to mean 'further, in addition, besides

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation even if it is not claimed by the assessee if assets are owned ITA No. 1785/Ahd/2012 & 08 others Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT(OSD) Asst.Years–2009-10, 2010-11, 2008-09, 2014-15 & 2015-16 and put to use by the assessee. Thus, Ground No. 6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed