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

section 68 of the Act. As per amended provisions, the assessee IT(SS)A No. 73/Ahd/2025 and others Group Appeals - HK Ispat Pvt Ltd Asst.Year : 2015-16 to 2021-2022 - 8– needs to explain source to source of sum credited to his bank account, the appellant submitted that such amended provisions not applicable to current year, thus the appellant

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

Section 68/41(1) of the Income Tax Act. In para 5.21, 5.22, page 18, CIT(A) has given factual aspect regarding introduction of two new partners namely Subhash Desai and Kalpesh Gilder. In para 5.24, he admits that sec. 68 is not applicable. Thereafter, in para 5.25, he applied sec. 41(1) after making reliance upon

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

68 and section 69A of the Act. 2.5 In respect of Assessment Year 2011–12, the Assessing Officer noted that, according to the seized documents in Annexure A-129, pages 161, 166

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

68 and section 69A of the Act. 2.5 In respect of Assessment Year 2011–12, the Assessing Officer noted that, according to the seized documents in Annexure A-129, pages 161, 166

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly kept open.\n10. All Revenue appeals fail on merits and are dismissed

68 and section 69A of the Act.\n2.5 In respect of Assessment Year 2011–12, the Assessing Officer noted that,\naccording to the seized documents in Annexure A-129, pages 161, 166

M/S. SHREE SAGAR INDUSTRIES,,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, HIMATNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1256/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ M/S.Shree Sagar Industries The Ito C/O. Patel Rajubhai M Ward-3, Vs. A-45, Shakuntala Society Himanatnagar Vijapur,Dist.Mehsana 384002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abmfs1529F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.S. Chhajed, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mudit Nagapal, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 09/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–7, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cit(A)-7/446/14-15 Dated 20/02/2017 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) R.W.S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 13/01/2015 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

166/- of interest income. 5) The appellant craves liberty to add, amend alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final disposal. 2. At the outset, we note that the issue raised by the assessee in ground No. 1 and 5 are general and therefore no separate adjudication is required. Accordingly, we dismiss the same as infructuous

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

section 14A of\nthe Act was warranted.\n16. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents:\nSouth Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT - [2022] 130 taxmann.com 178] (SC)\nCIT Vs. UTI Bank Ltd. - [2022] 142 taxmann.com 136 (SC)\nAxis Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT - [2024] 166 taxmann.com 348 (ITAT\nAhmedabad)\n17. The AR also drew our attention to the relevant financial

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

section 14A of\nthe Act was warranted.\n16.\nThe AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents:\nSouth Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT - [2022] 130 taxmann.com 178] (SC)\nCIT Vs. UTI Bank Ltd. - [2022] 142 taxmann.com 136 (SC)\nAxis Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT\n[2024] 166 taxmann.com 348 (ITAT\nAhmedabad)\n17.\nThe AR also drew our attention to the relevant

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

section 14A of\nthe Act was warranted.\n16.\nThe AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents:\nSouth Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT - [2022] 130 taxmann.com 178] (SC)\nCIT Vs. UTI Bank Ltd. - [2022] 142 taxmann.com 136 (SC)\nAxis Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT - [2024] 166 taxmann.com 348 (ITAT\nAhmedabad)\n17.\nThe AR also drew our attention to the relevant financial

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD., AHMEDABAD vs. NEPTUNE OVERSEAS LTD., ASHRAM ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

68 of the IT Act. ITO vs. Neptune Overseas Ltd. Asst. Year –2011-12 - 2– (f) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and / or to amend all or any of the ground before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer received information that the assesse had purchased units

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

68 as 147 read assessee to unexplained with provide credits due to Section adequate non- 144B evidence or compliance substantiate and lack of the substantiatio transactions n of the during the transactions. proceedings. ITA Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 2.3. The assessee preferred appeals before CIT(A) against the orders

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

68 as 147 read assessee to unexplained with provide credits due to Section adequate non- 144B evidence or compliance substantiate and lack of the substantiatio transactions n of the during the transactions. proceedings. ITA Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati vs. ITO Asst. Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 2.3. The assessee preferred appeals before CIT(A) against the orders

DILIPKUMAR SOHANLAL MAHESHWARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

68 of the Act r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. The assessment was completed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 29.03.2022 at total income of Rs.54,44,166

THE DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. ROSHANBEN Y. PARMAR,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1419/Ahd/2014 With Cross Objection No. 233/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

68 can be made only for credit received during year under consideration and not in earlier year. The Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Nasir Khan J. Mahadik 134 ITD 166 has held that Addition could not be made under section

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. PIYUSH SUBODHBHAI JHAVERI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

section 132(4A) of the Act is available only in respect of the person from whose possession the same is found and seized, which in the instant case is SCS and not the appellant and it could not be applied against a third party. No addition is warranted on the basis of material seized from the third party

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SOHAM COMMODITIES PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

section 132(4A) of the Act is available only in respect of the person from whose possession the same is found and seized, which in the instant case is SCS and not the appellant and it could not be applied against a third party. No addition is warranted on the basis of material seized from the third party

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act by the Learned AO to the tune of Rs.42,02,709/- was modified by the Learned CIT(A) by directing the Learned AO to restrict such addition to peak balance as a result whereof, Rs.8,95,166/- as worked out peak was finally added by the Learned ACIT(OSD), Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar by and under

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act by the Learned AO to the tune of Rs.42,02,709/- was modified by the Learned CIT(A) by directing the Learned AO to restrict such addition to peak balance as a result whereof, Rs.8,95,166/- as worked out peak was finally added by the Learned ACIT(OSD), Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar by and under