PROLIFE INDUSTRIES LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

194-I to the parties concerned. Further, the Assessee during the reassessment proceedings has filed confirmation of accounts, ITRs of the unsecured creditors with bank statements, ledger accounts, etc. However, the lower authorities have not accepted the unsecured loans, holding the same as not genuine, thereby making addition of the unsecured loans as well as the interest thereon

PROLIFE INDUSTRIES LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

194-I to the parties concerned. Further, the Assessee during the reassessment proceedings has filed confirmation of accounts, ITRs of the unsecured creditors with bank statements, ledger accounts, etc. However, the lower authorities have not accepted the unsecured loans, holding the same as not genuine, thereby making addition of the unsecured loans as well as the interest thereon

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NEESA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.213/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Acit, Cir.5 Vs. M/S.Neesa Infrastructure Ltd. Ahmedabad. Plot No.278/289 Panchratna Indl. Estate Opp: Amec Cold Storage Changodar, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabcn 7916 N

section 68 of the Act. Aggrieved Revenue is now before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, the ld.DR relied upon order of the AO. He also taken us through the remand report submitted by the AO before the ld.CIT(A). It is pointed out that there were several irregularities in the accounts of Shri Sanjay Gupta. The ld.DR submitted that

BHIKHABHAI HIRABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 04 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68, 69, Prerna Park, Nr. CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad - Jahalawadi Patel Society, 201010 Ahmedabad - 380008 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AMQPP5792C .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri S. V. Agrawal, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri Umesh Kumar Agarwal, Sr. Respondent by : D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of 30/01/2020 Hearing घोषणा क" तार

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 68 of the. Act were duly submitted during the course of assessment proceedings itself. It therefore appears that the addition has been made purely on the basis of surmises and conjectures because the appellant had already proved the genuineness of the credit entries. No addition can be made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions and that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA. vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 68 of the. Act were duly submitted during the course of assessment proceedings itself. It therefore appears that the addition has been made purely on the basis of surmises and conjectures because the appellant had already proved the genuineness of the credit entries. No addition can be made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions and that

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 of the Act. He further observed that the assessee has alleged payment of interest on these loans which were termed as bogus, therefore, the expenses claimed in the shape of interest deserves to be disallowed. He disallowed such interest expenditure and made addition of Rs.3,01,277/-. 5. Dissatisfied with the additions, the assessee carried the matter

AMBE TRADECORP PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.53/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 Ambe Tradecorp Private Limited, The P.C.I.T.(Central) Iscon House, Vs. Ahmedabad. B/H. Rembrandt Building, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad.

68 of the Act were not complied with by the assessee. Accordingly, the ld. PCIT issued a notice under section 263 of the Act dated 3rd March 2020 proposing the order of the AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue which was subsequently affirmed vide order dated 31-3-2021 for the reasons which have been

SHREE HARI ENTERPRISE ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nfollowing terms:\n\ni) Issue No

sections": [ "263", "143(3)", "142(1)", "194-I", "194J", "40(a)(ia)", "68", "194A" ], "issues": "Whether the Pr.CIT was justified

WAVES TRADELINE PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 days\n| Notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act\n| 25.05.2022\n| 27.05.2022\n| Date on which reply was required to be filed\nas per notice issued under Section 148A(b)\nof the Act\n| 15.06.2022\n| 17.06.2022\n| Date on which reply was filed by the\nassessee in response to the notice under\nSection 148A

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

194-I of the Act as alleged by the authorities below. Accordingly no disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS is warranted. 129. Before parting, it is also important to note that the ITAT in the own case of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA No. 1718/AHD/2011 has set aside the identical issue

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), , AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD.(ON BEHALF OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

194-I of the Act as alleged by the authorities below. Accordingly no disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS is warranted. 129. Before parting, it is also important to note that the ITAT in the own case of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA No. 1718/AHD/2011 has set aside the identical issue

GULMOHAR PARK MALL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

section 194 I of the Act which deals with TDS on Rent from letting out property. This TDS made by various parties also confirms the fact that the assessee derived the Rent income which is liable to be treated under the head of House Property only and can be bring to tax under the head of Business Income

GULMOHAR PARK MALL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

section 194 I of the Act which deals with TDS on Rent from letting out property. This TDS made by various parties also confirms the fact that the assessee derived the Rent income which is liable to be treated under the head of House Property only and can be bring to tax under the head of Business Income

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

194 wherein it was held as under: “We have no reason to take a different view. If the assessee had either consumed the raw material in its industrial activity or sold the finished good but for the unfortunate fire, surely the assessee would have earned income. Such income would have been eligible for deduction under section

NEELKANTH DEVELOPERS,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

68,965/- 3. The brief facts in relation to the case before us are that the assessee is builder and developer and has offered income on the basis of percentage completion method, whereas the TDS has been deducted by the purchaser of the property under section 194

NEELKANTH DEVELOPERS,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

68,965/- 3. The brief facts in relation to the case before us are that the assessee is builder and developer and has offered income on the basis of percentage completion method, whereas the TDS has been deducted by the purchaser of the property under section 194

SAHYOG CONSTRUCTION,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1) PREVIOUSLY CIRCLE-1(3), VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: PER SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

68 of the Act amounting to Rs.6.58 Crores. This credit pertained to unsecured loans taken by the assessee during the year from various parties which are listed in Para 5 of the assessment order. It is an admitted fact that the books of accounts of the assessee were rejected by the AO and income assessed by estimating