H K ISPAT PVT. LTD.,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

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

3. 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. 2,98,14,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under the provisions Section 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loans by ignoring the fact that addition has been made after

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

3. 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. 2,98,14,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under the provisions Section 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loans by ignoring the fact that addition has been made after

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

3. 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. 2,98,14,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under the provisions Section 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loans by ignoring the fact that addition has been made after

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

68 taxmann.com 246 (Bombay); (iii) Zuari Cements Ltd. v. ACIT [Writ Petition No. 5557 of 2012, dated 21-2- 2013] (Andhra Pradesh)- Revenue‟s SLP dismissed by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in CC No. 16694/2013 on 27th September 2013 38. What culminates from the aforesaid two sets of parallel decisions is that the provisions of section 144C

SANDEEP MOHANRAJ SINGHI,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE4(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

6 of 24 Section 68 of the Act in respect of proceeds received by the assessee on sale of shares. He explained that the capital gain arising on sale of shares was duly disclosed by the assessee in its return and deduction under Section 11(1A) of the Act was claimed, as eligible to the assessee. He submitted

AMBE TRADECORP PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.53/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 Ambe Tradecorp Private Limited, The P.C.I.T.(Central) Iscon House, Vs. Ahmedabad. B/H. Rembrandt Building, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad.

68 of the Act. Asstt. Year 2010-11 3 3.3 In view of the above the learned Principal CIT show caused the assessee vide letter dated 3rd March 2020 proposing to hold the order passed by the AO under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, as erroneous insofar prejudicial to the interest of revenue

ITO WARD-4(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. VALLEY COMTRADE PVT LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS JHAWAR COMTRADE PVT. LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2034/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 I.T.O, M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., Ward-4(1)(4), Vs. (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Ahmedabad. Pvt. Ltd.,) C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 68/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 M/S. Valley Comtrade Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, (Earlier Known As Jhawar Comtrade Vs. Ward-1(1)(3), Pvt. Ltd.,) Surat. C-205, Titanium Square, Near Parsoli Bmw Showroom, Thaltej Chokdi, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aadcs3553N

68 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT-A. 6. The assessee besides reiterating its submission made during assessment proceeding further filed the assessment order of the investor companies framed under section 143(3

SHREE SANAND TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.995/Ahd/2014 With Co No.167/Ahd/2014 (In Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) Shree Sanand Textiles The Dy.Cit (Osd) बनाम/ Industries Ltd. Circle-8 Vs. 10-A, Sattar Taluka Society Ahmedabad B/H. C.U. Shah College Navjivan Press Road Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamc 8881 G (Appellant & Cross Objector) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) The Dcit Shree Sanand Textile बनाम/ Circle-8 Industries Ltd., Vs. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil R.Shah, Shri Tushar Hemani & Ms.Kinjal Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.Dr

3,76,44,053/- during the year represents the unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. The assessee has claimed to have made sales to 6

THE DCIT.CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SANAND TEXTILE INDS.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.995/Ahd/2014 With Co No.167/Ahd/2014 (In Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) Shree Sanand Textiles The Dy.Cit (Osd) बनाम/ Industries Ltd. Circle-8 Vs. 10-A, Sattar Taluka Society Ahmedabad B/H. C.U. Shah College Navjivan Press Road Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamc 8881 G (Appellant & Cross Objector) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1166/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 1995-96) The Dcit Shree Sanand Textile बनाम/ Circle-8 Industries Ltd., Vs. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil R.Shah, Shri Tushar Hemani & Ms.Kinjal Shah, Ars Revenue By : Shri Vidhut Trivedi, Sr.Dr

3,76,44,053/- during the year represents the unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. The assessee has claimed to have made sales to 6

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

3: 61. The Revenue contends that the CIT(A) erred in holding that no objection was raised by the Department during High Court proceedings, and that the scheme’s compliance with section 2(1B) should have been more strictly interpreted. We note that the Department was duly served notice under section 394A of the Companies

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

3: 61. The Revenue contends that the CIT(A) erred in holding that no objection was raised by the Department during High Court proceedings, and that the scheme’s compliance with section 2(1B) should have been more strictly interpreted. We note that the Department was duly served notice under section 394A of the Companies

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

6) to the said parties and adjudicate the issue afresh after necessary verification. 14. The AR reiterated that the impugned additions suffered from multiple legal and factual infirmities and the AO had mechanically resorted to both section 68 and section 69A without proper analysis. It was submitted that the additions resulted in double taxation of the same amounts

SHRI NARENDRA B. PATEL,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3153/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Narendra B. Patel, I.T.O., 592, Pampaliva Vas, Vs. Ward-2, Moyad, Himatnagar. Sabarkantha-383110. Pan: Asupp6989M

68 of the Act to Section 69 of the Act. This action of Ld. CIT(A) is illegal and without jurisdiction firstly because the same has been done without issuance of any notice and secondly the same has been done mechanically without any application of mind. 3. The Ld. CIT (A), has erred in law and on the facts

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 69A. 3. The summary of year-wise assessments is given below: Sr. Particulars A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2014-15 No. 1 Date of 30.09.2011 29.09.2012 31.12.2015 filing Original Return 2 Returned 1,36,69,866/- 2,82,34,740/- 5,37,42,938/- Income in Rs. 3 Date of 31.03.2017 30.03.2017 30.03.2017 Issuance of notice

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 69A. 3. The summary of year-wise assessments is given below: Sr. Particulars A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2014-15 No. 1 Date of 30.09.2011 29.09.2012 31.12.2015 filing Original Return 2 Returned 1,36,69,866/- 2,82,34,740/- 5,37,42,938/- Income in Rs. 3 Date of 31.03.2017 30.03.2017 30.03.2017 Issuance of notice

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KRAFT LAMINATE, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Years : 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Kraft Laminate, Income-Tax, Vs C/O. Laxmi Timber, Nr. Circle 3(2), Ahmedabad Mahalaxmi Textile Mill, Opp. Rajbai Patel Timber Market, Narol Naroda Highway, Narol, Ahmedabad-382405 Pan : Aamfk 8120 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-:

68 of the Act. Ground No.2 of the Revenue’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 11. The issue raised in Ground No.3 relates to the deletion by the learned CIT(A) of the addition of Rs.4,72,176/- made by the Assessing Officer by way of disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act. 12. During the course of assessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, VEJAPUR vs. DARSHAN ORNA LIMITED, NAVRANGPURA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1606/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Income Tax Officer Darshan Orna Limited बनाम/ Vejalpur 102, Shri Balaju Paragon V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 C.G. Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aadcd 7142 E अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that it was maintaining regular books of accounts which were duly audited under the Companies Act, 2013 as well as under section 44AB of the Act, without

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GTC OILFIELDS SERVICES P. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the 8 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royappeal No. Ay Appellant Respondent Sn M/S. Gtc Oilfields Services P. Ltd., 2009-10 The Dcit, 61, New York Tower, A-Block, It(Ss)A Nos. 1-3 2010-11 Central Circle 1(4), Thaltej Char Rasta, S.G. Road, 314 To 316/Ahd/2019 2014-15 Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 Pan : Aaacg 8684 P The Dcit, M/S. Gtc Oilfields Services P. Ltd.

3. Baghban Marketing P Ltd has paid first installment of tax of Rs.1,15,00,000/-. Therefore, the income declared by Baghban Marketing P Ltd justifies the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness on their part, as per provisions of section 68 of the IT Act, 1961. 4. The company Yamini Marketing P Ltd has made investment in share capital

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

3) of the Act for the assessment year 2007-08. As such there was no new loan taken in the year under consideration. ITA nos.1438 & 2534/AHD/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 7 4.1 The AO has treated the credit entries appeared in the partners’ capital account as income under section 68 of the Act without giving the benefit