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

201 to 217 of the paper book. Thus, it is clear that the same cannot be added in the year under consideration as the same were not obtained in the current year. It is also important to refer the provisions of section 68

JAS INFRASPACE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 131 of the Act. Accordingly, no reference can be made to such statements. 71. We also note that the Ld. CIT-A has made the reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhansiram Aggarwal vs. CIT reported in 201 ITR 192 while confirming the order of the AO in part. However

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRA SPACE PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 131 of the Act. Accordingly, no reference can be made to such statements. 71. We also note that the Ld. CIT-A has made the reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhansiram Aggarwal vs. CIT reported in 201 ITR 192 while confirming the order of the AO in part. However

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRA SPACE PRIVATE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 131 of the Act. Accordingly, no reference can be made to such statements. 71. We also note that the Ld. CIT-A has made the reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhansiram Aggarwal vs. CIT reported in 201 ITR 192 while confirming the order of the AO in part. However

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JAS INFRASPACE PRIVATE LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 131 of the Act. Accordingly, no reference can be made to such statements. 71. We also note that the Ld. CIT-A has made the reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhansiram Aggarwal vs. CIT reported in 201 ITR 192 while confirming the order of the AO in part. However

THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. EAM FRUITS LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1835/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2016-2017 I.T.O, Eam Fruits Llp, Ward-7(2)(2), Vs. 23, New Fruit Market, Ahmedabad. Naroda Road, Naroda, Ahmedabad-380025. Pan: Aadfe6711B

68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.78,50,469/- though the assessee was not able to prove the genuineness of these transactions. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained Unsecured loan of Rs.47,50,000/- though the assessee was not able to establish the identity

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

201(1) of the Act are satisfied, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall be deleted. Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No.3 relating to addition of Rs.69,709/- u/s 43B of the Act. 8. During the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee had an outstanding VAT liability of Rs.17

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

201(1) of the Act are satisfied, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act shall be deleted. Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No.3 relating to addition of Rs.69,709/- u/s 43B of the Act. 8. During the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee had an outstanding VAT liability of Rs.17

ALPA UDAYKUMAR SHAH,,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

201, Siddhchakra Flats, Ward 1(2) Vs. Blood Bank Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Krishnanagar, Bhavnagar - Nakubaug, Bhavnagar 364001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : BFLPS7506A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Darshan Gandhi, Advocate Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by : 08/06/2022 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing घोषणा

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. Thus the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby allowed. 29. The next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹ 15 Lacs under the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 30. The AO during the assessment

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. Thus the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby allowed. 29. The next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹ 15 Lacs under the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 30. The AO during the assessment

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. Thus the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby allowed. 29. The next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹ 15 Lacs under the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 30. The AO during the assessment

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

68 of the Act. Thus the ground of appeal raised by the Assessee is hereby allowed. 29. The next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹ 15 Lacs under the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 30. The AO during the assessment

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

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICE LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE WEST LTD.),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

68,562/-imposed on the assessee under section 271C r.w.s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. Grievances raised by the appellant Assessing Officer are as follows:- “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the penalty u/s 271C although demand raised u/s 201

SMT. SWETALBEN R.VORA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1,, BHAVNAGAR

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The Id. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in upholding the disallowance of Rs.7,26,151/- being 75% of total disallowance of brokerage and commission expenditure of Rs.9

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. MEET ENTERPRISES, VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Act, primary onus is on the assessee to provide all necessary details and ITO Vs M/s. Meet Enterprises Page No.7 Asst.Year 2013-14 evidences. In this case, the assessee has provided copy of ledger account of M/s.Prabhaav Industries Limited, bank statement of the assessee for June and July 2012, confirmation of account from Prabhav Industries