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 69B of the Act. 46. At the outset we note that the issues raised by the Revenue in its ground of appeal for the AY 2013-14 are identical to the issues raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2130/AHD/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. Therefore, the findings given in ITA No. 2130/AHD/2017 shall also be applicable

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 69B of the Act. 46. At the outset we note that the issues raised by the Revenue in its ground of appeal for the AY 2013-14 are identical to the issues raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2130/AHD/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. Therefore, the findings given in ITA No. 2130/AHD/2017 shall also be applicable

DUSHYANT SHANTILAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

68, 69, and 69A.\nInterest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D was also levied.\nAccordingly, the assessed income

ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MAHESHWARI SALES CORPORATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1306/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Ito Maheshwari Sales Corporation बनाम/ Ward-4(2)(3) C-111, Ganesh Meridin V/S. Ahmedabad Nr.Sola Bridge, Sola Ahmedabad-380 058 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aalfm 4917 H (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 11/04/2025, Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-2019. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Ito Vs. Maheshwari Sales Corporation Asst. Year : 2018-19

68 of the Act, holding that the assessee had satisfactorily explained the nature and source of the transaction. Grounds relating to levy of interest under sections 234B, 234C, and 234D

IRM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1590/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Irm Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Irm House, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Off. C.G Raod, Circle 2(1)(1), Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380009. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaci3678M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

68 of the IT Act. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in levying interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D

SURENDRA MANGALDAS SHAH, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2013-14 Surendra Mangaldas Shah, Huf The Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) G/7, Amola Chambers Vs Ahmedabad. Cg Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aachs 6590 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate Assessee By : Adjournment Application Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/04/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 68 and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 4. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal: Ld. CIT (A) (NFAC) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal by rejecting adjournment application seeking time to file documentary evidence inferring that appellant was neither serious

LKS BULLION (IMPORT AND EXPORT) PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.382/Ahd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 L.K.S. Bullion (Import & The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Export) Pvt.Ltd. Ward-2(1)(3) 368, Lks House, Ahmedabad – 380 014 V/S. Khetarpal-Ni-Pole Manek Chowk Ahmedabad -380 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacl 7369 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 27/08/2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 18/12/2017 By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income L.K.S. Bullion (Import & Export) Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2010-11

68 of the Act, the confirmation by the Ld.CIT(A) of the AO's action to tax the income under Section 115BBE of the Act is also unwarranted. As the principal addition itself is deleted, the consequential levy of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D

TOSHIBA TECHNICAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. THE ADIT.,(INTL.TAXN.)-2, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year :2015-16 Toshiba Technical Services Vs. Acit, International International Corporation Taxation-2 (India Project Office) Ahmedabad. B-/12 Vijay Wadi Niwas Chs Ltd. Lokmanya Tilak Road Mulund East, Mumbai Pan : Aabct 9577 D

234D of the Act. 6. Interest under section 244A The learned AO erred in not correctly granting the interest under section 244A of the Act. 7. Levy of penalty under section 271(l)(c) That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned AO erred in proposing the initiation of the penalty proceedings

F.M.AMIN CO(DASHRATH),DASHRATH vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

68 OF INCOME TAX ACT MADE BY LEARNED A.O. WHICH WERE RECEIVED FROM THREE DEPOSITORS WITH SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCES. THIS ADDITION NEEDS TO BE DELETED. 2) THE LEARNED A.O. TAXED THE ABOVE AMOUNT U/S 115BBE OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND LEVIED TAX AT 60 PERCENTAGE OF THE AMOUNT ADDED. THIS BEING GENUINE TRANSACTION THE APPLICATION OF THIS SECTION

KALPANABEN VADILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above\nterms

sections": [ "147", "148", "68", "115BBE", "270A", "234A", "234B", "234C", "234D", "250", "151", "143(3)" ], "issues": "Whether the reopening of assessment

J K ASSOCIATES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1200/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ J K Associates Ito Vikram Plaza, Nr. Ward 4(2)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. Vishwakarma Mandir, Chandlodia, Ahmedabad - 382481 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aalfj9737G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Parin Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr 25/11/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 03.06.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That No Return Of Income Was Filed By The Assessee For The A.Y. 2017-18. An Information Was Received By The Ao That The Assessee Firm Had Purchased Immovable Property Of Rs.1 Crore During The F.Y. 2016-17 Relevant To A.Y. 2017-18. In The Absence Of Any Return Filed By The Assessee, The Source Of Investment By The Assesse In The Immovable Property Remained Unexplained. Therefore, The Proceedings Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short

68 on him. ITA No. 1200/Ahd/2024 [J K Associates Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2017-18 - 3 – 9 Ld. NFAC erred in upholding invocation of section 115BBE of the Act. 10 Charging of Interest u/s 234A,234B,234C & 234D

M/S. HIT IRON & STEEL PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

68 of the Act was duly discharged by the appellant. 2. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts confirming reassessment proceedings in absence of a valid 'reason to believe' to satisfy conditions laid down u/s 147 of the Act. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have held proceedings as unlawful, invalid and against the provisions

THE ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

234D under the Act. Your appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. Ground No. 1 is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. Ground No. 2, 6, 6.1 and Ground No.7 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Ground

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

234D under the Act. Your appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. Ground No. 1 is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. Ground No. 2, 6, 6.1 and Ground No.7 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Ground

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

234D under the Act. Your appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. Ground No. 1 is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. Ground No. 2, 6, 6.1 and Ground No.7 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Ground

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ACIT.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

234D under the Act. Your appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. Ground No. 1 is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. Ground No. 2, 6, 6.1 and Ground No.7 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Ground

AIRONA TILES LIMITED,SABARKANTHA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE HIMATNAGAR PRESENTLY THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1127/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Airona Tiles Limited The Dcit बनाम/ Ceramic City Circle Himatnagar. V/S. At & Post : Dalpur Presently The Dcit, Kathwada Road Circle-2(1)(1) Sabarkantha – 383 120 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aanca 3712 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil N. Shah & Aatish Shah Ars Revenue By : Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.10.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 21.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By Dcit/Acit, Circle Himatnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Airona Tiles Ltd. Vs. The Dcit, Circle Himatnagar - Presently The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1) Asst. Year : 2016-17

68 of the Act as Unexplained cash credit. 2.1. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, citing non-compliance, without considering the adjournment applications dated 19.09.2022, 21.12.2020, and 31.12.2020, which were duly uploaded by the assessee. Airona Tiles Ltd. vs. The DCIT, Circle Himatnagar - Presently The DCIT, Circle

M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

section 192 of the Act. But the assessee has claimed such expenses without deducting the TDS. Thus the impugned expenses cannot be allowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available