SHRI ALTAFHUSEN M. SIDDIKI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee i

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.577/Ahd/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.969/Ahd/2015 { "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Altafhusen M. Siddiki, Prop Dcit, Circle-9 Of Sunmoon Roadways 6/D/1, Vs Ahmedabad Pursottam Estate, Nr. Cozy Hotel, Ranipur Patia, Sarkhej Road, Narol, Ahmedabad-382405 Pan No.Arsps3765P

gains of business or profession under sub-section (3) and this sub-section were a payment or aggregate of payment made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn on a bank on account payee bank draft exceeds twenty thousand rupees, in such cases and under such circumstances as may be prescribed, having regard

HETIKA MAYANKKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice(Retd.) C V Bhadang & Dr.Brr Kumar

V BHADANG, PRESIDENT & DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT I.T.A. No.1718/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Hetika Mayankumar Patel, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3, Jagjivan Park, Ward-5(2)(2), Nr. Swati Society, Ahmedabad. Opp. Ishwar Bhavan, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. [PAN No.ANUPP4701E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri SN Divatia with Shri Samir Vora, ARs, Respondent by: Shi Yogesh Mishra, Sr.DR Date

THE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS CO.-OP. CREDIT LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

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

capital and bank interest was eligible for tax exemption u/s 80P of the act. The assessing officer has not accepted the explanation of the assessee and stated that providing credit facilities to its member was a separate and distinct activity from the banking activity. Consequently the assessing officer has treated the interest income earned from nationlised banks /co-operative banks amounting

SHREE RAM CO.-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,DAHOD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

gain of business attributable to such activities will be deductible. Earning of interest income from Bank is not activity for which income would be deductible. Therefore, the interest income earned from bank/co-operative bank amounting to Rs. 82,21,635/- was treated as income from other sources u/s. 56 of the act on which deduction u/s. 80P was disallowed. 3. Aggrieved

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage, it would be appropriate to analyze the business model of bank guarantees, with which corporate guarantees are sometimes compared, in the context of benchmarking

SARDAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1)(3),, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2156 & 2157/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 Sardar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd Ito, ‘’B’’, Alankar Apartment, Ward 3(1)(3), Vs. Parkarwada, Dandia Bazar, Baroda. Vadodara. Pan: Aaabt2648D

3 6.1 The assessee also submitted that the RBI had canceled its application for the banking activities. As such without having the valid registration certificate from the RBI, it cannot carry out banking activities. 6.2 The assessee also claimed that its application for the banking license is pending and subject to jurisdiction in the court of Hon’ble Gujarat High

SARDAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1)(3),, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2156 & 2157/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 Sardar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd Ito, ‘’B’’, Alankar Apartment, Ward 3(1)(3), Vs. Parkarwada, Dandia Bazar, Baroda. Vadodara. Pan: Aaabt2648D

3 6.1 The assessee also submitted that the RBI had canceled its application for the banking activities. As such without having the valid registration certificate from the RBI, it cannot carry out banking activities. 6.2 The assessee also claimed that its application for the banking license is pending and subject to jurisdiction in the court of Hon’ble Gujarat High

MUKESH CHHOTELAL GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Shri Mukesh Chhotelal Gupta The Dcit, Cir.(1)(1) Gupta Nivas Vs. Ahmedabad. Chandkheda Sabarmati Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Ablpg 9729 N (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ar : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

capital gains. The return of income was filed on 20.07.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 49,05,370/-. Notice under section 143(2) was served on 23.09.2019 and notices under section 142(1) were thereafter issued calling for details on the limited scrutiny issue. 2.2 As recorded by the AO, a perusal of Form 26AS revealed interest credited of Rs.14