GANDHI SHRENIK KANTILAL,GODHARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, GODHARA

In the result, appeal ITA 1758/Ahd/2018 is allowed and appeal ITA

bogus expenses under the garb of rent paid to the persons as specified under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. At the outset we note that the AO has made the disallowance of the rent expenses partly, meaning thereby, the AO has accepted part of the rent expenses as genuine. There was no basis provided

GANDHI SHRENIK KANTILAL,GODHARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, GODHARA

In the result, appeal ITA 1758/Ahd/2018 is allowed and appeal ITA

bogus expenses under the garb of rent paid to the persons as specified under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. At the outset we note that the AO has made the disallowance of the rent expenses partly, meaning thereby, the AO has accepted part of the rent expenses as genuine. There was no basis provided

MODULAR TANKS PVT. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, BARODA

In the result, Grounds No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2733/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Modular Tanks P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Ff-7, Panorama Complex Vs Baroda-390 007. Opp: Welcome Hotel R.C. Dutt Road Baroda-3900 005. Pan : Aabcr 6370 C

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. Hence, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7. The issue raised in ground no.2 is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition in part for Rs.1,35,000/- on account of sales commission expenses. 8. The assessee during the year has claimed sales commission expenses of Rs.12

U.B. COTTON PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2008-09 U.B. Cotton P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.4(1)(1) Indian Globe Chamber Vs Ahmedabad. 7Th Floor, 142 Wh Marg, Fort Mumbai 400 001. Pan : Aaacu 5526 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Written Submissions Revenue By : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/05/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

2. 5. While going through the written arguments, the submissions are nothing by repetition of the same as filed before the ld.CIT(A) and nothing new submissions or documents or evidence produced before this Tribunal. The ld.DR, Shri S.S.Shukla submitted the following submissions as against each ground of appeal: Ground No.1 “1.4 It is pertinent to mention that even during

RAMCHAND BHULCHAND RAJAI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1, , BHAVNAGAR

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 167/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 बनाम बनाम बनाम बनाम Ramchand Bhulchand Rajai, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. Jayesh Tyres, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Opp. Railway Station, Circle-1, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar-364001 Pan : Abmpr 4841 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri B.R. Popat, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta

2,83,207/-. The purchase register does not reflect expenses of Rs.12,12,400/- claimed by the assessee. Thus, the officer disallowed the unexplained expenses of Rs. 12,12,400/-. The Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 28.03.2014 confirmed the addition of Rs. 1,81,860/- due to non verifiability of claim of expenses and also considering the volume of freight

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), 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

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

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

JT. CIT (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PRADIP OVERSEAS LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Section 40A(2)a/40A(2)b. Considering all these facts a net profit of 0.5% is estimated on turnover of Rs.13.23 crores. Therefore, addition is sustained to extent of Rs.9.12 lakhs." 7. " None appeared on behalf of the assessee while as the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the learned AC sno prayed that the same may be sustained

RAJNIKANTH S BHALAVAT,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Final Appeal.”

purchases of Rs. 1,40,767/- made by Ld. A.O. invoking Sec. 40A (2)(b) of the Act. 4. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.” 3. The assessee has also taken the following additional Grounds of Appeal: “(1) The order passed by Ld AO is bad, illegal

PATEL KENWOOD PRIVATE LIMITED,ANKLESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 40A(2)(b)of the Act, onus to prove the unreasonableness is on the Assessing Officer only. After ascertaining the fair market price, services and facilities available in the society and then to make such disallowance. Moreover, both the authorities below to make requisite enquiries in the matter. Further the very same Assessing Officer for the subsequent Asst. Year

PATEL KENWOOD PRIVATE LIMITED,ANKLESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 40A(2)(b)of the Act, onus to prove the unreasonableness is on the Assessing Officer only. After ascertaining the fair market price, services and facilities available in the society and then to make such disallowance. Moreover, both the authorities below to make requisite enquiries in the matter. Further the very same Assessing Officer for the subsequent Asst. Year

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ARTEX APPARELS,, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, the said ground of appeal is also allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri T. S. Kapoorआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1450/Ahd/2017 With Cross Objection No.24/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13)

Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act applies to revenue expenditure whereas the amount in question was paid for purchase of plant and machinery which is capital in nature and therefore, assessee had not claimed any expenses and learned CIT(A) had therefore rightly allowed the relief to the assessee. 20. We have heard the rival parties and have gone

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1659/Ahd/2015 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1689/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 ) बनाम/ 1. Sun Pharmaceuticals 1. The Acit Industries Ltd. Cen.Cir-1 Vs. “Sparc” Tandalja Baroda – 20 2. The Acit 2. Sun Pharmaceu- Central Circle-1 Ticals Industries Baroda Ltd. Baroda. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 3124K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri R.C. Panday, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 28/03/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Cross-Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Vadodara [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cab/(A)- 2/387/2014-15 Dated 31/03/2015 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 14/02/2014 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. Ita Nos.1659/Ahd/2015 (By Assessee) & Ita No.1689/Ahd/2015 (By Revenue) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst.Year - 2008-09 2

40A(2)(b) of the Act. The details filed by the assessee in Annexure 2 are available on record. 17. We also note that AO in his assessment order has made the observation as detailed under: As per the information available with this office Unimed was primarily was functioning as job worker. ITA Nos.1659/Ahd/2015 (by assessee) and ITA No.1689/Ahd/2015

AURA SECURITIES PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.834/Ahd/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Dcit, Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, V Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Ahmedabad. S. House, 53, Shrimali Society, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.986/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Vs. Circle-1, House, 53, Shrimali Society, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N

40a , the value so determined shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, "quoted share" means the share quoted on any recognised stock exchange with regularity from time to time, where the quotation of such share

AURA SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.834/Ahd/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Dcit, Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, V Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Ahmedabad. S. House, 53, Shrimali Society, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.986/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Vs. Circle-1, House, 53, Shrimali Society, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N

40a , the value so determined shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, "quoted share" means the share quoted on any recognised stock exchange with regularity from time to time, where the quotation of such share

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-2016 The Dcit, Cir.4(1)(2) Vishal Exports Overseas P.Ltd. Polytechnic Vs. 301, Sheetal Complex Ahmedabad. Mayur Colony Mithakali, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaacv 2354 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Vivek Chavda, Ar Assessee By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025

purchase, sale, job work, or expenses had been found to be bogus or non-genuine. The AO had not invoked the provisions 6 of section 40A(2