RAMESHKUMAR MELAPCHAND SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

bogus which the AO failed to do so though he alleges that those purchases were not genuine. It amounts to only assumption by the AO against the facts on records gathered based on his own enquiries during the assessment proceedings. So, it is evident that purchase has happened during the period as mentioned by the AO and it is beyond

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAMESHKUMAR MELAPCHAND SHAH, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

bogus which the AO failed to do so though he alleges that those purchases were not genuine. It amounts to only assumption by the AO against the facts on records gathered based on his own enquiries during the assessment proceedings. So, it is evident that purchase has happened during the period as mentioned by the AO and it is beyond

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

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

bogus.\nIn line with the precedent relied upon, we hold that the ad hoc\ndisallowances for both years cannot be sustained, and the same are deleted.\nAs regards the Revenue's contention that the expenditure of Rs.78,82,000/-\nin A.Y. 2013–14 is capital in nature, we observe that these costs pertain to\nsite development and soil filling, which

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI MAHENDRAKUMAR LALJIBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

bogus sales to convert his unaccounted cash at hand as cash sales made. Accordingly, the ld. A.O. treated the cash deposit during demonetization period as unaccounted credit u/s. 68 of the Act and added the sum of Rs. 2,17,41,000/- as income of the assessee and also taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act and demanded tax thereon

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. CLARTECH ENGINEERS PVT LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1841/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dcit Clartech Engineers Pvt.Ltd. बनाम/ Circle-1(1)(1) Plot No.413, V. Road, V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Phase-Ii, Gidc Industrial Estate, Vatva Ahmedabad – 382 445 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadcc 2311 A (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent)

270/-, making various additions, including the disallowance of depreciation on CNC Lathe and the addition of alleged bogus creditors. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the depreciation on CNC Lathe Rs.1,28,975/- and deleting the addition of Rs.1,82,75,037/- on account of bogus creditors

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

bogus.\nIn line with the precedent relied upon, we hold that the ad hoc\ndisallowances for both years cannot be sustained, and the same are deleted.\nAs regards the Revenue's contention that the expenditure of Rs.78,82,000/-\nin A.Y. 2013–14 is capital in nature, we observe that these costs pertain to\nsite development and soil filling, which

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

bogus.\nIn line with the precedent relied upon, we hold that the ad hoc\ndisallowances for both years cannot be sustained, and the same are deleted.\nAs regards the Revenue's contention that the expenditure of Rs. 78,82,000/-\nin A.Y. 2013–14 is capital in nature, we observe that these costs pertain to\nsite development and soil filling

ROBIN RAMAVTAR GOENKA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

purchases, brokerage, salaries, personal expenses and jewellery were seized. Statements of key employees of the group handling cash transactions were recorded. Consequently, assessments were framed under sections 153A and 143[3] of the Act for the Asst Years 2018-19 & 2019-20 whereby Assessment Year wise unaccounted cash receipts and payments, as summarized by the AO, is given below

SANKALP IN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result Revenue’s Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

270 (Mum); * Madhav Corpn. vs ACIT– (2017) 85 taxmann.com 238 (Ahd); * DCIT v Kankakia Hospitality P Ltd. – (2019) 179 ITD 1 (Mum); 6.5. In view of the above, it is clear that Ld CIT(A) has taken utmost care while determining the income based on seized material. Consequently, balance additions have been rightly deleted. Hence, revenue’s appeals deserve

BHANU JEWELLERS ART,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

purchaser of smaller denominations, made the additions which is not sustainable in law. 7.1. Further the sales are found recorded in the sales register, stock register, cash book, etc. The impugned sum also formed part of the overall sales credited in the Profit & Loss account and offered for taxation under the head “Business Income”. Perusal of the stock register along

JIGNASA ATULKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

bogus accommodation entries operated and managed by entry operator Shri Naresh Jain. The information also suggests that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries in manipulation of share price of M/s. Oasis Tradelink Ltd. amounting to Rs.40,95,442/- and assessee claimed Long Term Capital Gain exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act amounting to Rs.37,24,755/-. Therefore

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP IN, AHMEDABAD

In the result Revenue's Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, Judicial Member\nAnd\nShri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

270 (Mum);\n* Madhav Corpn. vs ACIT– (2017) 85 taxmann.com 238 (Ahd);\n* DCIT v Kankakia Hospitality P Ltd. – (2019) 179 ITD 1 (Mum);\n6. 5. In view of the above, it is clear that Ld CIT(A) has taken\nutmost care while determining the income based on seized\nmaterial. Consequently, balance additions have been rightly\ndeleted. Hence, revenue

SANKALP ORGANISERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

purchases, brokerage, salaries, personal expenses and jewellery were seized. Statements of key employees of the group handling cash transactions were recorded. 2.1. Accordingly, assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the amount being unaccounted receipts should not be treated as undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act and the amount being unaccounted payments incurred in cash should

SANKALP VENTURE LLP,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

purchases, brokerage, salaries, personal expenses and jewellery were seized. Statements of key employees of the group handling cash transactions were recorded. 2.1. Accordingly, assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the amount being unaccounted receipts should not be treated as undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act and the amount being unaccounted payments incurred in cash should

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP VENTURE LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

purchases, brokerage, salaries, personal expenses and jewellery were seized. Statements of key employees of the group handling cash transactions were recorded. 2.1. Accordingly, assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the amount being unaccounted receipts should not be treated as undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act and the amount being unaccounted payments incurred in cash should

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP ORGANISERS PVT LTD , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

purchases, brokerage, salaries, personal expenses and jewellery were seized. Statements of key employees of the group handling cash transactions were recorded. 2.1. Accordingly, assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the amount being unaccounted receipts should not be treated as undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act and the amount being unaccounted payments incurred in cash should

SHALIN RAJENDRAKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

purchaser of smaller denominations, made the additions which is not sustainable in law. 7.1. Further the sales are found recorded in the sales register, stock register, cash book, etc. The impugned sum also formed part of the overall sales credited in the Profit & Loss account and offered for taxation under the head “Business Income”. Perusal of the stock register along