CHIRAG ISHWARBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(6), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1182 & 1192/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Chirag Ishwarbhai Patel, I.T.O., 49 Dharamanth Prabhu Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(6), Near Adishawar Society, Ahmedabad. Nikol Road, Naroda, Ahmedabad.

purchases from him, reopening notice against assesses was justified" 2.4. Further, the appellant has also not brought any specific evidences suggesting that this issue was considered in original Assessment Proceedings. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel v/s ACIT, 236 ITR 832 (Guj) has held as under: j "Section 147 of the Income

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

145(3) of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in partly confirming the addition of bogus purchases made by Ld. AO without providing information/document/material used against the appellant and opportunity of cross-examination resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

145(3) of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in partly confirming the addition of bogus purchases made by Ld. AO without providing information/ document/ material used against the appellant and opportunity of cross-examination resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

145(3) of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in partly confirming the addition of bogus purchases made by Ld. AO without providing information/ document/ material used against the appellant and opportunity of cross-examination resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

145(3) of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in partly confirming the addition of bogus purchases made by Ld. AO without providing information/ document/ material used against the appellant and opportunity of cross-examination resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred

RUDRA GLOBAL INFRA PRODUCTS LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

2– of the Act as evident from the computation sheet issued along with the assessment order. 4. Alternatively and without prejudice, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in upholding the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases u/s. 69C of the Act. S.69C has no application in the present case as the purchases

SAKET M JAINI(HUF),AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-5, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 579/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Saket M. Jain (Huf), The Pr. Commissioner Of 403, 3Rd Eye Two, Vs. Income Tax-2, Nr. Joyalukkas Show Room, Ahmedabad. Opp. Parimal Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad.

2) Sale is not genuine and proper for the reason that both the parties are i.e. Assessee and buyer were not paying sales tax. Similarly, the invoice does not contain sale tax details or registration detail. Asstt. Year 2009-10 4 (3) Purchase against the sale is also bogus on the basis of information received from the I.T.O ward

MARUTI METAL INDUSTRIES,,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-1,, BHAVNAGAR

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

bogus purchases u/s 69C of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of interest paid of Rs. 2,55,534/-” 3. The brief fact of the case is that the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,80,77,360/- was filed on 30th Sep, 2010. The assessee firm

THE DY. CIT, (OSD)-I, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KINTECH SYNERGY PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Method of accounting -Estimation of Profits [Bogus purchases] - Assessment year 2006-07 - Assessee was engaged in business of trading in steel on wholesale basis - Assessing Officer having found that some of alleged suppliers of steel to assessee had not supplied steel to assessee but had only provided sale bills, held that purchases made

THE DY. CIT, (OSD)-I, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KINTECH SYNERGY PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Method of accounting -Estimation of Profits [Bogus purchases] - Assessment year 2006-07 - Assessee was engaged in business of trading in steel on wholesale basis - Assessing Officer having found that some of alleged suppliers of steel to assessee had not supplied steel to assessee but had only provided sale bills, held that purchases made

KSHETRAPAL GOLD PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kshetrapal Gold Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sf-1, Kush Avenue, Mandvi Ni Ward 2(1)(2), Pole, Manek Chowk, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380001 Pan : Aafck 6724 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" यथ" Assessee By : Shri Mahesh Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.10.2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.11.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit (A) Is Against Law, Equity & Justice. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding Rejection Of Books Of Accounts In Contravention To The Provisions Of Act. 3. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding Addition Made By The Ld. A.O. U/S 68 Of The Act Even After Rejection Books Of Accounts.

145. (1) Income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" or "Income from other sources" shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be computed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. (2) The Central Government may notify in the Official Gazette from time to time income

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

purchase of the properties should be made taxable under the head capital gain and accordingly the assessee is entitled for the exemption under section 54F of the Act. Thus, it seems to us by this finding of the ITAT (us), the grievance of the revenue is answered against it. 15.13 However, for the completeness of the case, we are inclined

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

bogus by the Maharashtra VAT department. To our understanding, based upon the information received from the 3rd party, until and unless it is confronted to the assessee, no adverse inference can be drawn. There can be various reasons for the cancellation of the registration such as ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

bogus by the Maharashtra VAT department. To our understanding, based upon the information received from the 3rd party, until and unless it is confronted to the assessee, no adverse inference can be drawn. There can be various reasons for the cancellation of the registration such as ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

bogus by the Maharashtra VAT department. To our understanding, based upon the information received from the 3rd party, until and unless it is confronted to the assessee, no adverse inference can be drawn. There can be various reasons for the cancellation of the registration such as ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

bogus by the Maharashtra VAT department. To our understanding, based upon the information received from the 3rd party, until and unless it is confronted to the assessee, no adverse inference can be drawn. There can be various reasons for the cancellation of the registration such as ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

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

2. The assessee was repeatedly asked to furnish further contra confirmation in respect of one major party, Mis. GSEC Ltd. from where the assessee company had made purchase of Rs.56.3 crores out of total purchase of Rs.6G.35 crores, but the assessee did not furnish contra confirmation despite being afforded various opportunities. 3. The assessee had made major sales of Rs.42.55

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

2. The assessee was repeatedly asked to furnish further contra confirmation in respect of one major party, Mis. GSEC Ltd. from where the assessee company had made purchase of Rs.56.3 crores out of total purchase of Rs.6G.35 crores, but the assessee did not furnish contra confirmation despite being afforded various opportunities. 3. The assessee had made major sales of Rs.42.55

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

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

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

2. The assessee was repeatedly asked to furnish further contra confirmation in respect of one major party, Mis. GSEC Ltd. from where the assessee company had made purchase of Rs.56.3 crores out of total purchase of Rs.6G.35 crores, but the assessee did not furnish contra confirmation despite being afforded various opportunities. 3. The assessee had made major sales of Rs.42.55