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

68,93,96,668/- instead of deleting the same in entirety. 50. There was a survey operation under section 133A of the Act dated 17th October 2013 at the premises of the assessee. In the course of survey operation, a diary marked as annexure AS-2 was found wherein the construction cost as on the date of survey

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

68,93,96,668/- instead of deleting the same in entirety. 50. There was a survey operation under section 133A of the Act dated 17th October 2013 at the premises of the assessee. In the course of survey operation, a diary marked as annexure AS-2 was found wherein the construction cost as on the date of survey

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-12,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,VII,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. ASIAN AGENCY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCEL-7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

68 of the Act can be made on alleged difference in closing balance of creditor in assessee’s books viz-a-viz creditor books. However the CIT(A) found that difference in closing balance arises due to proceeds of cash sale of Rs. 5,40,17,485/- which were directly deposited to the bank of creditor M/s KFIL without recording

M/S. SOUTH SHOURNE CORPORATION (INDIA),,BARODA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-2(2),, BARODA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.269/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2004-2005 M/S South Shourne Corporation(India) Acit, 931, Gidc Estate, Circle-2(2), V Makarpura, Baroda. S. Baroda.

68 of the Act. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by him. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 10. The second ground raised by the assessee is that Ld.CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 33,594 in respect

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT INFOTECH LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

section 68 of the Act, These are : (i) the identity of investors; (ii) their creditworthiness/investments, and (iii) the genuineness of the transaction. In the present case, the assessee company failed to prove all three conditions cumulatively. 5. Further, An assessee's explanation of the nature and source of the credits cannot be entertained and held satisfactory unless and until

M/S. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

68 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. As regards additional ground, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer while reopening the assessment has reviewed the original assessment order and, therefore, the review of the original assessment

HARPREET KAUR KAUSHIK MANEK,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-1,, BHAVNAGAR

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that there is no basis of the sum of Rs.5,46,88,613/- i.e. the amount mentioned in reasons for reopening and considered while making the impugned addition by the Assessing Officer as the assessee had carried out the commodity transactions through M/s. Kunvarji Finstock

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132(4) of the Act that he was settlor of the trust and that the beneficiaries of the trust were all his family members constituted incriminating material. The Ld. CIT.DR submitted that in spite of being confronted with all the documentary evidences which clearly established that the foreign bank accounts belonged to the assessee, the assessee

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132(4) of the Act that he was settlor of the trust and that the beneficiaries of the trust were all his family members constituted incriminating material. The Ld. CIT.DR submitted that in spite of being confronted with all the documentary evidences which clearly established that the foreign bank accounts belonged to the assessee, the assessee

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132(4) of the Act that he was settlor of the trust and that the beneficiaries of the trust were all his family members constituted incriminating material. The Ld. CIT.DR submitted that in spite of being confronted with all the documentary evidences which clearly established that the foreign bank accounts belonged to the assessee, the assessee

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132(4) of the Act that he was settlor of the trust and that the beneficiaries of the trust were all his family members constituted incriminating material. The Ld. CIT.DR submitted that in spite of being confronted with all the documentary evidences which clearly established that the foreign bank accounts belonged to the assessee, the assessee

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132(4) of the Act that he was settlor of the trust and that the beneficiaries of the trust were all his family members constituted incriminating material. The Ld. CIT.DR submitted that in spite of being confronted with all the documentary evidences which clearly established that the foreign bank accounts belonged to the assessee, the assessee