ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

68 It was noted that Tribunal recorded findings of facts that assessee had furnished details such as copy of ledger account, bank statements, income-tax returns, balance sheet etc. of loan givers - It was also recorded that notice under section 133(6

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. RUDRA GLOBAL INFRA PRODUCTS LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee, both are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 133(6) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(A), after an elaborate examination of facts and documentary evidence, deleted the addition by recording detailed factual findings as under:- “6.1 The only substantial

AANYA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rifaur Rahman

section 68 but with due respect to those case laws and the Ld. ARs, in my considered opinion, the appellant has failed to establish that the facts of those case laws are similar to the facts of the appellant as marshalled by the AO after analyzing the details received on enquiry u/s 133(6

ITO WARD-4(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. VALLEY COMTRADE PVT LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS JHAWAR COMTRADE PVT. LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2034/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 I.T.O, M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., Ward-4(1)(4), Vs. (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Ahmedabad. Pvt. Ltd.,) C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 68/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Vs. Ward-1(1)(3), Pvt. Ltd.,) Surat. C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N

6 furnished under section 131 of the Act of the entry providers stating that they were controlling/ managing the affairs of the investor companies including the shareholders of the investor companies. Accordingly, there cannot be drawn any adverse inference against the assessee based on the statement of the entry providers under the provisions of section

ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MS GOODFARM REARING, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

133(6) of the Act and provided\ndocumentary evidence. The other partner, Goodfarms Calfcare LLP, did not\nrespond. Relying solely on the non-response, the AO treated the capital\ncontribution of Rs.8,00,00,000/- by Goodfarms Calfcare LLP as unexplained\ncash credit and made an addition under section 68

SHREE SARAS SPICES & FOODS P. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 478/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Shree Saras Spices & Foods Pvt. I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-4(1)(3), A/3, 4Th Floor, Ahmedabad. Casela Tower,, Opp. Iscon Mandir, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad-380015

6) of the Act. But the AO without making independent inquiry or bringing any other material on record concluded that the assessee failed to discharge its onus cast under section 68 of the Act. We also note that during the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) Ahmedabad has issued notices under section 133

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SARAS SPICES & FOOD PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 478/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Shree Saras Spices & Foods Pvt. I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-4(1)(3), A/3, 4Th Floor, Ahmedabad. Casela Tower,, Opp. Iscon Mandir, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad-380015

6) of the Act. But the AO without making independent inquiry or bringing any other material on record concluded that the assessee failed to discharge its onus cast under section 68 of the Act. We also note that during the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) Ahmedabad has issued notices under section 133

DHARMANANDAN DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

133(6) of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee did not discharge the onus to prove the genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of Shri Sanjivkumar Kiritkumar Patel and treated the sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- as income of the assessee under Section 68

INCOME TAX OFFICER, VEJAPUR vs. DARSHAN ORNA LIMITED, NAVRANGPURA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1606/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Income Tax Officer Darshan Orna Limited बनाम/ Vejalpur 102, Shri Balaju Paragon V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 C.G. Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadcd 7142 E अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

68 could be made merely because of doubts regarding the identity of customers or abnormality in sales pattern. The CIT(A) recorded that the AO had not found any specific discrepancy in the purchase records, sales records, stock register, or cash book. It was observed that though notices under section 133(6

ARVINDBHAI PUNABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly accepted in principle, and the issue is restored to the\nAssessing Officer for fresh adjudication in terms of directions\nabove.\n25. In the combined result, the appeal of the assessee ...

133(6) of the Act to the Branch\nManager of the ICICI Bank Ltd. The AO proceeded to complete\nthe reassessment ex-parte on 13.12.2017. In the reassessment\norder, the Assessing Officer made a substantive addition of\nRs.16,94,93,035/- under section 68

HARISHKUMAR KHUSHALRAY BHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2) NOW WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Harishkumar Khushalray Bhatt Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) P/1, Chandragupta Apartment Vs. Ahmedabad. Nr. Gordhandas Patel Hospital Vastrapur Ahmedabad. Pan : Abspb 3786 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh L. Shah, Ar : Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

133(6) to the said parties and adjudicate the issue afresh after necessary verification. 14. The AR reiterated that the impugned additions suffered from multiple legal and factual infirmities and the AO had mechanically resorted to both section 68

DHARAMTAR MOTORS SERVICES PETROLEUM PRODUCT,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the results, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1438 & 2534/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S Dharamtar Motor Services Income Tax Officer, Petroleum Product, Vs. Ward 6(1)(4) C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate 903, Ahmedabad. Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aabfd9182F

133(6) there is no justification for applying Section 41(1) since CIT(A), ultimately in his appeal order is para 5.6 has applied the aforesaid Section. In para 5.20, it is held that the assessee has not established genuineness on the unsecured loans even though stated by the assessee that the unsecured loans carried forward from

AMARPADMA CREDITS PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

68 read with section 115BBE of the Act is found correct and accordingly ground of appeal No.3 is dismissed.” 5 Amarpadma Credits Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO AY : 2017-18 6. The assessee is an appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A), confirming the additions made by the AO. Before us, the Counsel

SHRI UMIYA COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ,1, SENETARY ROAD , KUTCHHI PATIDAR VADI, PETLAD TAL. PETLAD DIST. ANAND vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

In the result, Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

6– 9. In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No.2:- Addition of Rs. 1,06,47,500/- under Section 68 of the Act. 10. This ground relates to addition of Rs. 1,06,47,500/- on account of acceptance by the assessee of SBN currency during the demonetization period

SHRI JAYANTILAL BABULAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

68 of the Act in proving the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the lenders. Further, the assessing officer initiated independent enquiries by issuance of notice under section 133 (6

THE ACIT., CENT.CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI JAYANTILAL BABULAL SHAH, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

68 of the Act in proving the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the lenders. Further, the assessing officer initiated independent enquiries by issuance of notice under section 133 (6

RAJESH BALVANTRAI BRAHMBHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT(CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

133(6) issued, assessee replied on 13.04.2021 that advances refunded through banks. Survey Follow- - Assessee’s statement up Statement recorded u/s. 131 during (06.07.2022) survey at Aayakar Bhavan. - Confirmed joint ownership of Makarba land; clarified that land was still agricultural; NA conversion under dispute; no conveyance deed executed till date. ITA No.1157 to 1160/Ahd/2025 5 2.4 The Assessing Officer, after

RAJESH BALVANTRAI BRAHMBHATT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT(CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

133(6) issued, assessee replied on 13.04.2021 that advances refunded through banks. Survey Follow- - Assessee’s statement up Statement recorded u/s. 131 during (06.07.2022) survey at Aayakar Bhavan. - Confirmed joint ownership of Makarba land; clarified that land was still agricultural; NA conversion under dispute; no conveyance deed executed till date. ITA No.1157 to 1160/Ahd/2025 5 2.4 The Assessing Officer, after