DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA vs. NEOTECH EDUCATION FOUNDATION, VADODARA

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,35,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment u/s.69B of the I.T.Act, when the seized document itself proves that the assessee had made investment of Rs.1,35,00,000/- (altogether Rs.5,68

SMT. INDUMATI C. PANDEY L/H OF LATE CHANDRABHAN R. PANDEY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1),, BARODA

In the result, ITA No.2142/Ahd/2015 and CO No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is dismissed. However, it is observed that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO it can be demonstrated that the tax effect is more, or Revenue’s case falls within the ambit

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. SMT. INDRAMATI C. PANDEY WIDOW & L/H OF LATE CHANDRABHAN R. PANDEY,, BARODA

In the result, ITA No.2142/Ahd/2015 and CO No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is dismissed. However, it is observed that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO it can be demonstrated that the tax effect is more, or Revenue’s case falls within the ambit

THE DCITANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING CO.LTD.,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Roysr.No.

68,929/- (Rs. 1,34,95,379/- + 61,73,550/-) has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2006-07 within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. I, therefore, issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act for A.Y. 2006-07 to the assessee after obtaining necessary approval of the higher authority. 4.1 Regarding the reason no. 1

THE DCITANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING CO.LTD.,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Roysr.No.

68,929/- (Rs. 1,34,95,379/- + 61,73,550/-) has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2006-07 within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. I, therefore, issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act for A.Y. 2006-07 to the assessee after obtaining necessary approval of the higher authority. 4.1 Regarding the reason no. 1

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. I.C. PANDEY AGRO PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-2(1)(3) M/S.I.C. Pandey Agro Private Ltd. Ahmedabad. D/1001, Sarthak Tower Vs. Ramdevnagar Satellite, Ahmedabad Pan : Aadci 3305 G

68,000/- Surcharge (Nil being less than 1 Cr) NIL Education Cess @2% on Tax 33,360 Secondary and Higher Secondary Education 16,680 Cess @1% on Tax Total Tax 17,18,040 4. The ld.DR has not disputed applicability of above circular cited by the ld.counsel for the assessee, and has not pointed out whether the case

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-11,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI PRATAP BHAGWANJI THAKKAR,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal ITA No

268A of the Income Tax Act, we are of the view that the present appeal of the Revenue deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. However, it is observed that in case on re-verification at the end of the AO it comes to the notice that the tax effect is more or Revenue’s case falls within

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

68 r.w.s 115BBE on account of exempt LTCG u/s 10(38) of the Act from penny stock scrip in the shell companies.“ 37. Brief Facts : 37.1. The brief facts relevant to the issue under consideration are that the assessee declared long term capital gain during the year under consideration in respect of shares sold during the year and claimed

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DUKAAS FABRICS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2007-2008 Ito, Ward-1(1)(4) M/S.Dukaas Fabrics P.Ltd. Ahmedabad. Vs. 82, Soham Row House B/H. Bhavin Vidhya Vihar Thaltej Gam Ahmedabad 380 059. Pan : Aaacd 5324 K

1, Ahmedabad dated 30.5.2016 passed for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the Id.CIT(A) in deleting addition made by the AO under section 68 of the Act. 3. The Id.counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that disputed addition in the present appeal is Rs.65,00,000/-, and therefore

THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI NARESH RAMSINHBHAI THAKOR,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2007-2008 Ito, Ward-6(1)(3) Shri Naresh Ramsinhbhai Thakor Ahmedabad. Vs. Thakor Vas Khokhara Ahmedabad Road Ahmedabad.

1)(3) Shri Naresh Ramsinhbhai Thakor Ahmedabad. Vs. Thakor Vas Khokhara Ahmedabad Road Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, AR Assessee by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 23/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/09/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Revenue is in appeal before

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NAVRATNA ORGANISERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

1) Navratna Organizers & Developers P. Ltd. 2nd Floor, Kaycrest Ahmedabad. Vs. Opp: Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Nr. Parimal Crossing Ahmedabad. PAN : AAACN 5181 E (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue by : Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR : Assessee by Shri Tushar Hemani, with Shri P.B. Parmar, AR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 31/10/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 18/01/2019 आदेश

AMAZON TEXTILES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect, whereas appeal of the assessee is dismissed due to non- prosecution

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1406/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014

1)(iii) made by the AO for Rs.43,52,172/- is restricted at Rs.12,87,357/-. This ground of appeal is partly allowed.” If this Rs.12,87,357/- is reduced from Rs.43,52,172/-, then tax effect on the remaining amount along with deletion of disallowance made under section 14A would be less than Rs.20 lakhs, and the appeal

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. AMAZON TEXTILES PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect, whereas appeal of the assessee is dismissed due to non- prosecution

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1406/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014

1)(iii) made by the AO for Rs.43,52,172/- is restricted at Rs.12,87,357/-. This ground of appeal is partly allowed.” If this Rs.12,87,357/- is reduced from Rs.43,52,172/-, then tax effect on the remaining amount along with deletion of disallowance made under section 14A would be less than Rs.20 lakhs, and the appeal

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1210/Ahd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 ) The Asst.Commissioner Of Nirma Chemical बनाम/ Income Tax Works Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Circle-5 Nirma House, Ashram Ahmedabad Road Ahmedabad-380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn5353L .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Sr.Adv.

68,026/- u/s.36(1)(iii) of the I.T.Act. 2. The Ld.Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the disallowance of power project expenses to the extent of Rs.33,74,078/-, instead of disallowance of Rs.56,44,827/- made by the Assessing Officer. 3. The Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BAHETI METAL & FERRO ALLOYS LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2014-2015 Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Baheti Metal & Ferro Alloys Ltd. Ahmedabad. Vs. A-2/3, L.R. Apartment Opp: Police Commissioners Office Shahibaug, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacb 4626 L

1, Ahmedabad dated 30.8.2017 passed for the assessment year 2014-15. The Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the Id.CIT(A) in 2. deleting the disallowance of FCNRB hedging charges of Rs.74,68,104/- 3. At the outset, the Id.counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable because tax effect on the disputed

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. NAVNIRMAN CO OP BANK LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1973/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Dcit Navnirman Co-Op. Bank Ltd. बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(1) Navnirman Bhawan V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Opp. Hdfc Bank Ahmedabad City Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabfn 2975 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hem Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 32.49,945/-on account DCIT vs. Navnirman Co-op.Bank Ltd. Asst. Year : 2016-17 2 of unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act., without appreciating the facts of the case?" 2. “Whether on the facts

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. B. ZAVERI JEWELS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Cir.(1)(1)(1) B. Zaveri Jewels P.Ld. Ahmedabad. Vs. C/O. Arunbhai Soni, 1 Shikshapatri Bungalows Science City Road, Sola Ahmedabad 380 060 Pan: Aadcb 3832 B

1 Shikshapatri Bungalows Science City Road, Sola Ahmedabad 380 060 PAN: AADCB 3832 B (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, AR : None Assessee by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 30/08/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/09/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against

ITO, S.K.WARD-2,, HIMATNAGAR vs. M/S. RAMDEV PROFILES,, SABARKANTHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Has Sustained The Disallowance Holding That Payment In Cash Was Not Covered In Any Of The Exceptions Provided In Rule 6Dd Of The It Rule.

1)(c) of the act is premature at this stage, therefore, the same are dismissed. I.T.A Nos. 2564 & 2612/Ahd/2014 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 4 M/s. Ramdev Profiles vs. ITO 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. ITA No. 2612/Ahd/2014 filed by revenue 9. The grievance of the Revenue is that