SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 3. Theses appeals were initially decided by this Tribunal ex- parte on 12.10.2022. Thereafter, the assessee had filed Miscellaneous Applications which were decided in M.A. No. 33 to 35/Ahd/2023 dated 26.07.2023 and all the three orders dated 12.10.2022 were recalled for the reason that the assessee’s appeal

SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 3. Theses appeals were initially decided by this Tribunal ex- parte on 12.10.2022. Thereafter, the assessee had filed Miscellaneous Applications which were decided in M.A. No. 33 to 35/Ahd/2023 dated 26.07.2023 and all the three orders dated 12.10.2022 were recalled for the reason that the assessee’s appeal

VIRBALA KIRITKUMAR PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-5 PRESENT JURISDICTION CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

delay is hereby condoned, in the interest of justice. 3. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. In law and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed u/s 250 of the Act by Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary, erroneous, contrary to the provisions of law and on facts. 2

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

condone the delay. 6. So far as the maintainability of the proceeding initiated under Section 147 of the Act is concerned, the crux of the submission made by the Ld. A.R. is this that the same is based on change of opinion. No new and/or any tangible material was available with the Ld. AO to come to a conclusion that

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

condone the delay. 6. So far as the maintainability of the proceeding initiated under Section 147 of the Act is concerned, the crux of the submission made by the Ld. A.R. is this that the same is based on change of opinion. No new and/or any tangible material was available with the Ld. AO to come to a conclusion that

SHANTI MULTILINK PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.31/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shanti Multilink Pvt.Ltd. The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ A-215, Siddhi Vinayak Tower Ward-4(1)(3) Off S.G. Road Ahmedabad-380 015 V/S. Makarba Ahmedabad – 380 051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aahcs 1972 M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) ….. "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vivek Chavda, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 09/11/2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 28/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Shanti Multilink Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2016-17

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The appeal shall now be heard on merits. Shanti Multilink Pvt.Ltd. vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2016-17 Facts of the case: 3. The assessee-company filed its return of income on 03.10.2016 declaring total income of Rs.26,56,070/-. The case was selected under CASS for limited scrutiny. During the course

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Final Appeal.”

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 and without jurisdiction as the Ld AO has made additions which were

YUDO HOT RUNNERS INDIA PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER,NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16

40A(2)(b) of the Act and confirmed the addition under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act. After taking cognisance of the assessee’s submissions, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.1,21,467/- thereby stating that the assessee has evaded tax. 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed appeal

DHARMENDRA JINENDRA JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following Grounds of Appeal: I.T.A No. 1432/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No 2 Dharmendra Jinendra Jain vs. ITO 1. The Id, CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has dismissed appeal

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.

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. 4. The first issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT(A) erred in not treating the assessee’s status as AOP. A.Y. 2010-11 3 5. The facts in brief are that the assessee claimed itself a partnership firm

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. OM LAND REALITY PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1572/Ahd/2019 With C.O No.24/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 The Dcit, M/S. Om Land Reality Pvt. Ltd., Circle-3(1)(2), बनाम 302, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Ahmedabad. Abhiship Complex Nr. Keshav Baug Party Plot, Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaaco9406D ( ""यथ" /Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Dr Assessee By : Ms Amoli Gusani, Ar

40A(2)(b) of the Act amounting to Rs. 11,21,735/- 8. The Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition on account of capital loss amounting to Rs. 3,16,785/- 9. The Ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 63,61,066/-on account of brought forward loss. 10. On the facts

AIRONA TILES LIMITED,SABARKANTHA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE HIMATNAGAR PRESENTLY THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1127/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Airona Tiles Limited The Dcit बनाम/ Ceramic City Circle Himatnagar. V/S. At & Post : Dalpur Presently The Dcit, Kathwada Road Circle-2(1)(1) Sabarkantha – 383 120 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aanca 3712 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil N. Shah & Aatish Shah Ars Revenue By : Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.10.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 21.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By Dcit/Acit, Circle Himatnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Airona Tiles Ltd. Vs. The Dcit, Circle Himatnagar - Presently The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1) Asst. Year : 2016-17

delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF. - Rs.10,100/- under Section 43B of the Act on account of Disallowance of professional tax. - Rs.9,640/- relating to (Prior period expenses) disallowed as they pertained to an earlier year. - Rs.65,000/- under Section 40A(3) of the Act being cash payment exceeding Rs.20,000/- in a day. - Rs.12,80,000/- under Section

PRAKASH DHUDALAL SANGHVI,HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1) PREVIOUSLY WARD-5(2)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal for the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

condone the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 was filed by the assessee on 30.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.6,17,390/-. The case was selected for scrutiny to examine large cash deposits during demonetisation period and abnormal increase

THE DCIT,(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. MIDVALLEY HEALTHCARE SERVICES PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

condone the delay in filing the CO of the assessee. Hence, we admit the CO filed by the assessee and proceed to decide the issue on merit. ITA No.204/Ahd/2013 with C.O.No.45/Ahd/2015 and 7 others A.Y. 2008-09 19 14.1 The first objection raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the alternate claim

BHAGWANDAS DETARAM RAIMALANI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 under the head ‘salary’. The assessee filed copy of VAT return as well as Profit & Loss account relating to salary expenses claimed and copy of income tax returns of the two parties. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.6,60,000/- towards expenditure, addition of Rs.35,045/- as GP addition

ITO MEHSANA WARD 5 KADI, KADI vs. THE GOZARIA PEOPLES CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, GOZARIA

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ito, Mehsana Ward-5 The Gozaria Peoples Co-Operative Kadi. Vs Credit Society Ltd. 2, Main Bazar At Gozariya Ta. Mehsana 383 825 Gujarat. Pan : Aaajt 1283 G (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri B.K. Patel, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Durga Dutt, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

40A(7) on account of gratuity provision • Rs.89,91,830/- disallowed deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) Thus, the AO assessed total income at Rs.16,66,03,120/- and initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A and 271AAC(1) of the Act. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay of 183 days

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. KOTA BARAN TOLLWAY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2025/Ahd/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Kota Baran Tollway Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 222, Advait Complex, Nr. Circle-2(1)(2), Sandesh Press Road, Ahmedabad Vastrapur, Ahmedabad [PAN No.AAECK2595B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR Respondent by: Shri

M/S. TECHNODOT ENGINEERS LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the matter is restored to the file of Ld

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

condonation application giving reasons for the delay. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law in dismissing the grounds of appeal without considering the appellant’s stance in every ground and giving sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in holding that

TRISHA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-2(1)(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13

2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 08.08.2013 and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) vide order dated 05.03.2015. The Assessing Officer made the following additions: 1 Total income as per return of Rs.73,34,156/- income Additions: (a) Disallowance under section 14A Rs.5,90,932/- (b) On account of withdrawal of Right Rs.22