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

6 IT(SS)A No. 2020-21 ACIT, HK Ispat Pvt. Ltd., 78/Ahd/2025 Central Circle-2, Panchmahal, Godhra Vadodara [PAN : AACCH 0966 K] 7 IT(SS)A No. 2018-19 HK Ispat Pvt. Ltd., DCIT, 80/Ahd/2025 Panchmahal, Godhra Central Circle-2, [PAN : AACCH 0966 K] Vadodara 8 IT(SS)A No. 2019-20 HK Ispat Pvt. Ltd., DCIT, 81/Ahd/2025 Panchmahal

SHAILESHBHAI BHA vs. ANGBHAI CHAVDA,BHAVNAGARVS.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4) BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

68 to the tune of I.T.A No. 248/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No. 3 Shaileshbhai Bhavsangbhai Chavda vs. ITO Rs 16,79,307/- ignoring the evidences and submissions filed before Ld AO. 6. The appellant further reserves its right to add, alter, amend or modify any of the aforesaid grounds before or at the time of hearing of an appeal

ALKABEN KETULKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

68 of the 1961 Act read with Section 115BBE and added to the income of the assessee. 5.Aggrieved, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A), who issued notice of hearings dated 13th January, 2021,10th August, 2023, 23rd August, 2023 and 29th September, 2023 which were claimed by the CIT(A) to have delivered

JADE GRANITES INDUSTRIES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 23-11-2023 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058173176(1)

section 68. In the case of CIT vs Mohankala, 161 1 Таxтan 169, 291 ITR 278, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that May be the money came by way of bank cheques and paid through the process of banking transaction but that itself is of no consequence" In the case of CIT vs Saravana Construction

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(2), (FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 , which appeal before ld. CIT(A) has in turn arisen from the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1035873474(1) , dated 24-09-2021, and the second appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 87/Ahd/2024 has arisen

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2)(FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 , which appeal before ld. CIT(A) has in turn arisen from the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1035873474(1) , dated 24-09-2021, and the second appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 87/Ahd/2024 has arisen

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 ...

sections": [ "143(3)", "147", "148", "142(1)", "133(6)", "68", "271(1)(c)", "250", "69", "69A" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

SHREENATH DEVELOPERS,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(5), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

6– statement for Financial Year 2016-17 without considering the subsequent transaction. The appellant clarified that this balance payment of Rs. 68,00,000/- was actually made in the Financial Year 2017-18 and is duly reflected in the bank statement for that year. Accordingly, it was submitted that Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the additions without discussing the facts

PREMILA MUKESHBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 16Th October, 2023 Passed By 2

6) by the Assessing Officer to the Indian Bank calling for the account opening, account statement, KYC, cash deposit during demonetization period , and the Indian Bank duly furnished the requisite information called for by the Assessing Officer. Finally show cause notice dated 11.12.2019 was also issued to the assessee by the Assessing Officer, which was claimed to have been duly

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], in relation to the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer, ITO Ward 3(3)(2), Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer /AO”], dated 06.12.2019, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Facts of the Case 2. The assessee

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)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The appellant-assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding disallowance made by Ld. AO for Rs. 45,997/- being

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. STHAPATYA SHILP CONSTRUCTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 907/Ahd/2019 With C.O.No.170/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 D.C.I.T., M/S. Sthapatya Shilp Construction, Central Circle-1(2), Vs. 2, Abhiraj Complex, Ahmedabad. 68-B, Swastic Society, Ahmedabad. Pan: Abffs2922P

6 assessment years. This question has been answered by the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shaialesh S Patel vs. ITO reported in 97 taxmann.com 570 wherein it was held as under: With C.O.No.170/Ahd/2019 Asstt. Year 2010-11 11 The overriding provisions of section 153C merely enables the Assessing Officer to set aside the pending reassessment proceedings

MANISH DEVENDRAKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in full

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.918/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Manish Devendrakumar Shah The Ito बनाम/ 206, 2Nd Floor, Kalash 1 Ward-5(3)(1) V/S. Navrangpura Ahmedabad Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aqjps 4226 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar & Shri Samir Vora, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20 /02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Section 68 of the Act, concluding that the assessee failed to justify his investment in a company with no business operations, the assessee was aware of price rigging as he purchased shares through preferential allotment, the price spike was unnatural, indicating manipulation. The CIT(A) relied on judicial precedents, such as, Swati Bajaj (Calcutta High Court), Suman Poddar (Supreme

SHRI DHANESH P. SONI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

68 11,00,000/- Short Term Capital Gain 62,34,253/- Penalty proceeding was also initiated in respect of Serial No. 2 & 3, which was culminating into levy of penalty of Rs.22,66,283/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2) on 26.03.2014. In appeal, notices were issued u/s 250

M/S. DESCHEM TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2),, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1551/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2005-2006 M/S Deschem Technologies Resources I.T.O., Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ward-1(2), 106 To 108, Baroda. Shreeji Avenue, Opp. New India Mill, Jetapur Road, Baroda-390035. Pan: Aabcd7163P

6 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was served, it was learnt that Mr. Nitin Parmar had not furnished the required documentary evidences. Ld. CIT(A), in the first round of litigation, allowed deduction 10B and consequently held that all other grounds, including the ground challenging addition under section 68 of the Act, became infructuous. On Revenue's appeal

AADITYA DIAMGOLD PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2017-18 Aaditya Diamgold Pvt.Ltd. The Income Tax Officer 21, 1St Floor Iscon Arcade V. Ward-1(I)(I) Nr.Lal Bungalows Ahmedabad Cg Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad Gujarat – 380 009 Pan: Aalca 4525 A अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri Parimal Sinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Ramit Kocharthis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Appellate Order Dated 14/07/2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Cit(A)” In Short] Under Section 250 Of Sub-Section (6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2017-18 (Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/ 1054374868(1)), The Appellate Proceedings Have Arisen Before Ld. Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2019 Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of Aaditya Diamgold Pvt.Ltd. V. Ito Ay 2017-18

section 250(6) of the Act. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in making an addition of Rs.66,90,000/- u/s 68

ABHAYKUMAR SEVANTILAL SANGHAVI,DEESA vs. OLD JURISDICTION- CIRCLE,PALANPUR NEW JURISDICTION-CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1367/Ahd/2024 & 1368/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Abhaykumar Sevantilal Acit Circle, Palanpur बनाम/ Sanghavi [Old Jurisdiction-Circle, V/S. Sanghavi Brothers Palanpur. 1St Floor, Swastik Bldg New Jurisdiction-Circle, Nr. City Police Station Gandhinagar.] Nr. Dena Bank, Main Bazar Deesa – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afbps 1660 L (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Pertain To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved Are Common & Connected, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. The Appeals Arise Out Of The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The

Section 115BBE Not applicable Yes Total Additions by AO Rs. 94,71,572 Rs. 1,08,44,820/- Assessed Income by AO Rs. 90,48,690/- Rs. 1,35,21,250/- 3. The assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), who found no merit in the assessee's appeals for both assessment years, sustaining all additions and disallowances made

ABHAYKUMAR SEVANTILAL SANGHAVI,DEESA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE- PALANPUR , PALANPUR

Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1367/Ahd/2024 & 1368/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Abhaykumar Sevantilal Acit Circle, Palanpur बनाम/ Sanghavi [Old Jurisdiction-Circle, V/S. Sanghavi Brothers Palanpur. 1St Floor, Swastik Bldg New Jurisdiction-Circle, Nr. City Police Station Gandhinagar.] Nr. Dena Bank, Main Bazar Deesa – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afbps 1660 L (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Pertain To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved Are Common & Connected, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. The Appeals Arise Out Of The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Under Section 250 Of The

Section 115BBE Not applicable Yes Total Additions by AO Rs. 94,71,572 Rs. 1,08,44,820/- Assessed Income by AO Rs. 90,48,690/- Rs. 1,35,21,250/- 3. The assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), who found no merit in the assessee's appeals for both assessment years, sustaining all additions and disallowances made