SHRI KIRTIKUMAR VASANTBHAI THAKKAR,,PATAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PATAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Purchases, disallowed by the AO, in terms of quantity and value. Hence, no penalty is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of additions sustained, on estimate basis, and same is deserves to be deleted. 1.3 That as per law and as per settled legal propositions, penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not applicable when

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PANKAJ COTTON INDUSTRIES, PATAN

section 68 addition of unexplained cash credits from Rs. 3,23,85,600/-; respectively. Latter assessment year 2009-10 involves assessee’s appeal ITA 467/Ahd/2013 emanating from the very CIT(A)’s order dated 24-12-2012 in case no. CIT(A)-I/CC.1(1)/140/2010-11, inter alia disallowing bogus purchases of Rs. 25821773/- in case of M/s Vinayak Trading, similar

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. M/S. ULTRA TECH TRANSMISSION,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

purchases. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,61,75,302/- on account of disallowance of bogus payment to sub-contractors without appreciating that the bills/invoices raised by the sub-contractors show the technical work done i.e. erection, fixing

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. M/S. ULTRA TECH TRANSMISSION,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

purchases. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,61,75,302/- on account of disallowance of bogus payment to sub-contractors without appreciating that the bills/invoices raised by the sub-contractors show the technical work done i.e. erection, fixing

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. M/S. ULTRA TECH TRANSMISSION,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

purchases. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,61,75,302/- on account of disallowance of bogus payment to sub-contractors without appreciating that the bills/invoices raised by the sub-contractors show the technical work done i.e. erection, fixing

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. ULTRA TECH TRANSMISSION,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

purchases. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,61,75,302/- on account of disallowance of bogus payment to sub-contractors without appreciating that the bills/invoices raised by the sub-contractors show the technical work done i.e. erection, fixing

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. M/S. ULTRATECH TRANSMISSION PVT. LTD, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

purchases. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,61,75,302/- on account of disallowance of bogus payment to sub-contractors without appreciating that the bills/invoices raised by the sub-contractors show the technical work done i.e. erection, fixing

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRA SPACE PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133A of the Act. In other words the revenue can resort to the provisions of section 131 of the Act if the assessee doesn’t co-operate during the survey proceedings or tries to evade the relevant formations. However in the case on hand, we note that there is no such allegation that the assessee was not cooperating during

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRASPACE PRIVATE LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133A of the Act. In other words the revenue can resort to the provisions of section 131 of the Act if the assessee doesn’t co-operate during the survey proceedings or tries to evade the relevant formations. However in the case on hand, we note that there is no such allegation that the assessee was not cooperating during

JAS INFRASPACE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133A of the Act. In other words the revenue can resort to the provisions of section 131 of the Act if the assessee doesn’t co-operate during the survey proceedings or tries to evade the relevant formations. However in the case on hand, we note that there is no such allegation that the assessee was not cooperating during

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRA SPACE PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133A of the Act. In other words the revenue can resort to the provisions of section 131 of the Act if the assessee doesn’t co-operate during the survey proceedings or tries to evade the relevant formations. However in the case on hand, we note that there is no such allegation that the assessee was not cooperating during

SHRI NITESH G.THAKKAR,,PATAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediain "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt.Year : 2008-09 Shri Nitesh G. Thakkar Ito, Ward-1 Patan. Prop: M/S.Deep Cotton Industries Vs Jaska Road, Valmikinagar Harij-384240; Dist : Patan. Pan : Adwpt 3924 H

section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 1.9.2008 in conjunction with other search and 2 survey actions at the premises of edible oil mills group of Patan District and agents/brokers of Mehsana and Sabarkantha districts of Gujarat. Subsequent to the survey, the assessee filed return of income for the Asstt.Year

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

Section 133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 07.03.2003. The findings of the said survey as mentioned in the assessment order for AY 2000-01 were as under:-- “1. No insurance cover was taken for the computers 2. No adequate evidences relating to the real purchase of computer hardware were produced

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AWAS DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 368/Ahd/2020 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, M/S Awas Developers, Central Circle-1(4), Vs. “Agam Buglows” Ahmedabad. Opp. Subhash Society, Sanand-Kalol Road, Ahmedabad.

133A of the Act which does not carry evidentiary value. At this point of time, it is important to mention that the Higher Judicial forum has time and again held that no addition merely on the basis of noting in diary/loose paper etc. can be made unless other corroborative materials brought on record by the revenue to hold that

M/S. B. J. COTTON INDUSTRIES,,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1320/Ahd/2018 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 M/S. B.J Cotton Industries D.C.I.T, Modasar Char Rasta, Vs. Circle-3(1), At Modasar, Vadodara. Po Bodeli, Ta. Sankheda, Dist. Baroda-391135./ Anil R. Shah (C.A) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor, B/H. M.J Library, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aagfb3067J

133A of the Act wherein unaccounted stock of 2119 quintal having value of ₹ 65,68,900/- was found and therefore, the same being unaccounted stock was added to the total income of the assessee. 4. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) was pleased to confirm the order of the AO. 5. Being aggrieved by the order

SABBIRALI ALIMIYA SAIYED,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 904/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-15 वष"

section 133A of the Act wherein it was accepted that the company namely M/s AGIL was used in penny stock transactions to provide bogus long-term capital gain to the beneficiaries. b. As the company, M/s AGIL was indulged in penny stock transactions, the SEBI has suspended it as a part of surveillance measures. c. The assessee has not sold

M/S MARUTI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

bogus purchases by estimating net profit at 40%, which in first appeal restricted by the ld.CIT(A) at Rs.13,19,651/- by taking average estimated net profit at 7%. Assessee is against partly confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.13,19,651/- by estimating net profit @7%; and Revenue is against deletion of addition of Rs.2

ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S MARUTI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

bogus purchases by estimating net profit at 40%, which in first appeal restricted by the ld.CIT(A) at Rs.13,19,651/- by taking average estimated net profit at 7%. Assessee is against partly confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.13,19,651/- by estimating net profit @7%; and Revenue is against deletion of addition of Rs.2