THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI PETRONET( DAHEJ) PORT PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

disallowed such loss in assessment order on the ground that "Assessee company has claimed loss on account of re-statement of loans/credit liability existing as' on the date of balance sheet by swapping the loan from Dollar to Swiss Franc to reduce its Forex exposer risk and therefore the loss claimed by the Assessee was not of Revenue in nature

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI PETRONET( DAHEJ) PORT PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

disallowed such loss in assessment order on the ground that "Assessee company has claimed loss on account of re-statement of loans/credit liability existing as' on the date of balance sheet by swapping the loan from Dollar to Swiss Franc to reduce its Forex exposer risk and therefore the loss claimed by the Assessee was not of Revenue in nature

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI PETRONET (DAHEJ) PORT PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

disallowed such loss in assessment order on the ground that "Assessee company has claimed loss on account of re-statement of loans/credit liability existing as' on the date of balance sheet by swapping the loan from Dollar to Swiss Franc to reduce its Forex exposer risk and therefore the loss claimed by the Assessee was not of Revenue in nature

SWAMINARAYAN CO.OP.BANK LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1411/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Swaminarayan Co-Op. Bank Ltd. The Acit बना 1, Ashok Chambers Circle-3(1) Opp. Pathak Gate Police Station Ahmedabad म/ Madanzampa Road V/S. Vadodara 390 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaas 1932 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) …… "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Kanabar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 9/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 08/07/2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 27/02/2019 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11. Swaminarayan Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2010-11

set off as claimed by appellant. It is therefore requested that there is no concealment of income and there is no concealment of furnishing the information along with the return. The disallowance being a technical disallowance of a liability of unabsorbed losses

THE JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Jcit, Cir.3(1)(2) Shri Rajkamal Builders Ahmedabad. Vs Infrastructure P.Ltd. Pan : Aabcr 0326 A 54, Park Hill, Nr.Heaven Park Ramdevnagar Ahmedabad 380 015. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Jaiswal,Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 8/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed, Accounant Member: This Is Revenue’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-9, Ahmedabad Dated 19.11.2018 Vide Which The Ld.Cit(A) Has Deleted Penalty Of Rs.1,05,74,312/- Imposed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" For Short) For The Asst.Year 2012-13. 2. Sole Ground Raised By The Revenue Reads As Under: “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.1,05,74,312/- Imposed U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act On Issue Of Disallowance Of Losses Set Off & Deduction Under Section 80Ia Of The Act Of Rs.3,11,10,071/-.”

disallowance of losses set off & deduction under section 80IA of the Act of Rs.3,11,10,071/-.” 2 3. The necessary

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

disallowance made by AO is correct. 11.2 So far as alternate contention of appellant that both the appellant and TPPL are assessed to tax at maximum marginal rate and there is no loss of revenue, it is observed that in present case, appellant has incurred speculative loss in such transactions apart from such loss being bogus and accommodative loss. Once

N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

disallowance made by AO is correct. 11.2 So far as alternate contention of appellant that both the appellant and TPPL are assessed to tax at maximum marginal rate and there is no loss of revenue, it is observed that in present case, appellant has incurred speculative loss in such transactions apart from such loss being bogus and accommodative loss. Once

ESTHDEV FINANCIAL AVISOR PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13

disallowed. Thus, the issue related to notice under Section 142(1) of the Act not properly issued is rejected. A.Y. 2012-13 Page 4 of 4 8. As regards to merits of the case is concerned, the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings noticed from the Profit & Loss account that equity trading loss had been set

ROSEBYS INTERIORS INDIA LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” We shall first take up assessee’s appeal. Disallowance of foreign exchange losses

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ROSEBYS INTERIORS INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” We shall first take up assessee’s appeal. Disallowance of foreign exchange losses

SHRI JITENDRA MANILALA MALKAN,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

set-off against his income from profession by treating the same as business loss. However, the Ld Assessing Officer treated the said loss as short-term capital loss on the ground that the shares were held as investment as the assessee was not in the business of purchase and sale of shares and disallowed

MANIBHADRA SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

set off of such profit on the sale purchase of the properties against the losses from the sale purchase of the securities amounting to Rs.12,66,98,547.00. However, the AO found that such losses are bogus in nature and therefore he disallowed

MANIBHADRA SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

set off of such profit on the sale purchase of the properties against the losses from the sale purchase of the securities amounting to Rs.12,66,98,547.00. However, the AO found that such losses are bogus in nature and therefore he disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1466/Ahd/2024 & 1467/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively The Acit Rajkamal Builders बनाम/ Circle-3(1)(1) Infrastrucutre Pvt.Ltd. V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 54, Park Hill Nr.Heaven Park Ramdevnagar, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcr 0326 A अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ritesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

set-off of losses of Rs.49,39,271/- from loss-making infrastructure units. The AO disallowed the deduction on the grounds

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1466/Ahd/2024 & 1467/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively The Acit Rajkamal Builders बनाम/ Circle-3(1)(1) Infrastrucutre Pvt.Ltd. V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 54, Park Hill Nr.Heaven Park Ramdevnagar, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcr 0326 A अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ritesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

set-off of losses of Rs.49,39,271/- from loss-making infrastructure units. The AO disallowed the deduction on the grounds

INCOME TAX OFFICER, VEJALPUR vs. DIGITAL BIOTECH PVT. LTD., MEMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2016-17 Digital Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax Officer, Vs A/9, Yashprabha Apartment, Ward-1(1)(3), Behind Janta Ice Cream, Ahmedabad Gurukul Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad -380052 Pan : Aaccd 1831 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar:

set of facts, such decision has to be reconsidered.” 15. Further while dealing with the same issue Hon’ble High Court in para 11 stated that :– ITO Vs. Digital Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Year : 2016-17 6 “11. Insofar as the second contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is concerned, the controversy stands squarely concluded by the decision

M/S. KANKARIA MANINAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Kankaria Maninagar Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nagarik Sahakari Bank Income Tax Vs. Circle – 6(1), Ahmedabad Ltd. Bhagwan Chamber, Maninagar Char Rasta, Maninagar, Ahmedabad 380008 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaak6862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Rahul Patel, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. While One Appeal Is Against Order U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), The Other One Is Against The Rectification Order U/S. 154 Of The Act. These Appeals Were Heard Together And

set-off only against similar capital gain. Further, the assessee had claimed depreciation of Rs.34,48,500/- on Government securities and as per the reason recorded by the AO, such claim of depreciation was admissible only in respect of business assets. Accordingly, the loss of Rs.38,55,000/- on sale of Government securities was disallowed

M/S. KANKARIA MANINAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Kankaria Maninagar Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nagarik Sahakari Bank Income Tax Vs. Circle – 6(1), Ahmedabad Ltd. Bhagwan Chamber, Maninagar Char Rasta, Maninagar, Ahmedabad 380008 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaak6862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Rahul Patel, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. While One Appeal Is Against Order U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), The Other One Is Against The Rectification Order U/S. 154 Of The Act. These Appeals Were Heard Together And

set-off only against similar capital gain. Further, the assessee had claimed depreciation of Rs.34,48,500/- on Government securities and as per the reason recorded by the AO, such claim of depreciation was admissible only in respect of business assets. Accordingly, the loss of Rs.38,55,000/- on sale of Government securities was disallowed