ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search conducted in case of third party more particularly when no details related to appellant are found therein. The ld CIT(A) ought to have treated notice u/s 148 as invalid as AO ought to have issued notice u/s 153C of the Act as proceedings have been initiated based upon documents

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby\nallowed

reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search\nconducted in case of third party more particularly when no details related to\nappellant are found therein. The ld CIT(A) ought to have treated notice u/s\n148 as invalid as AO ought to have issued notice u/s 153C of the Act as\nproceedings have been initiated based upon documents

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

AARAV FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

reassessment order requires to be quashed as void-ab-initio. 5. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering copy of material or evidences relied upon including statements recorded as referred to and relied upon in the reasons recorded, along with an opportunity of cross examination of such persons for initiating the proceedings u/s 147

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

bogus suppliers. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 and framed the ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 3 reassessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. On finding that the assessee had not satisfactorily discharged the onus of establishing the genuineness of purchases and the identity of the suppliers, the AO invoked the provisions

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three\nby the assessee, stand dismissed

147 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of\nthe case, the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and in not\npermissible either in law or on facts.\n2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of\nthe Ld. AO in rejecting books of accounts u/s

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three\nby the assessee, stand dismissed

147 of the Act based on information received from\nthe Investigation Wing of the Department, indicating that the\nassessee had entered into transactions with accommodation\nentry providers, including M/s. RCI Industries and Technologies\nLtd. and others. It was further revealed during the proceedings\nthat the assessee had made purchases from entities flagged in\nGST investigations as bogus suppliers. The Assessing

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

147 of the Act for the said year. 2. It was common ground that identical issue was involved in all the appeals, relating to disallowance of sales promotion expenses incurred by the assessee. It was pointed out that the said disallowances was made in identical set of facts and circumstances finding the expenses to be bogus and the Ld.CIT

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

147 of the Act for the said year. 2. It was common ground that identical issue was involved in all the appeals, relating to disallowance of sales promotion expenses incurred by the assessee. It was pointed out that the said disallowances was made in identical set of facts and circumstances finding the expenses to be bogus and the Ld.CIT

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT TERCE LABORATORIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue are allowed

147 of the Act for the said year. 2. It was common ground that identical issue was involved in all the appeals, relating to disallowance of sales promotion expenses incurred by the assessee. It was pointed out that the said disallowances was made in identical set of facts and circumstances finding the expenses to be bogus and the Ld.CIT

OVEZ ARIFBHAI LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

reassessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 30th March, 2022 , should not be revised within the provisions of section 263 of the Act. The said show cause notice is reproduced hereunder:- “M/s/Ms/Ms Subject: Notice for Hearing in respect of Revision proceedings u/s 263 of the THE INCOME TAX ACT-1961-Assessment Year 2014-15. In this regard

BHAGAT MARKETING PVT LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. PCIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, in light of the above observations and the judicial precedents on the subject, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

bogus purchases in accordance with law and thus revision under section. 263 is nothing but a change of opinion and hence order u/s. 263 is bad in law. 2. The directions given to AO in para 7, 7.1 and 8 of order under section 263 by the ld. Pr.CIT are already carried

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. LEELA GREENSHIP RECYCLING PRIVATE LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of above directions

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 2111/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Leela Greenship Recycling Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Office No.303, 3Rd Floor, बनाम/ Commissioner V/S. B Wing, Leela Efcee, Of Income Tax, Near Aksharwadi Temple, Circle-1, Waghawadi Road, Bhavnagar. Bhavnagar-364002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aagcg8956L

reassessment initiated under section 147 of the Act. After setting out the statutory framework governing reopening of assessments and analysing a series of judicial pronouncements, the learned CIT(A) recorded a categorical finding that the reopening was valid. It was held that the information received from the GST anti-evasion wing regarding the assessee’s transactions with Mahadev Trading

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, BARODA vs. M/S. ULTRA TECH TRANSMISSION,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for assessment year 2016-17

u/s 44AD by creditors does not lead to conclusion about genuineness of the transactions. The audited accounts of the appellant have also not been rejected by AO. 5.7 The issue can also be looked at from another angle. While the fact regarding revenue being declared from the work carried out through the engagement of sub- contractors is a strong factor