SHRI JAY KHODIYAR MAJOOR S M LTD.,AT CHHALANKA, TAL. VISAVADAR, DIST. JUNAGADH vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee dismissed

Bench: Hri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

02,543/- from Bank of Baroda had been disallowed by the Assessing Shri Jay Khodiyar Majoor S M Ltd. vs. PCIT Asst.Year –2017-18 Officer and added to the income of the assessee. Accordingly, the assessment order is not erroneous with respect to the aforesaid issue raised by Ld. PCIT. Thereafter, the Ld. PCIT issued another notice dated

M/S. D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S DML EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

ALPHA HI-TECH FUEL LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SNR CIRCLE,, SURENDRANAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.68/Rjt/2009 (धििाधरणणवध/ Assessment Year 2005-06) Alpha Hi-Tech Fuel Limited, बिाम/ D.C.I.T, Station Road, Surendranagar Vs. Lakhtar, Dist. Surendranagar, Gujarat-382775 स्ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaca4258P (अपीला््/Appellant) (प्य््/ Respondent) अपीला््थरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R Shri B.D Gupta, Sr. D.R. प्य््करथरसे/Respondent By: सुिणाईकरतारीख/ Date Of Hearing 08/06/2023 घोवणाकरतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/09/2023 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:

02-2023, running from pages 1 to 12 wherein it was inter alia contended as under: 6. Row, before the Hon'ble ITAT the assessee has raised a totally new claim of i.e. setting up of a new industrial undertaking in the FY:2003-04 i.e. AY 2004-05. Though no claim for deduction U/s 80IA(4) was made

THE ASSTT. DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

02,214/- as all the conditions prescribed in sub-section 2 of section 271AAA have been fulfilled. It is also held that in respect of balance undisclosed income of Rs. 1,67,68,242/-, the AO has correctly levied the penalty u/s 271AAA as undisclosed to this explanation was neither offered in the return of income nor the due taxes

BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

02,214/- as all the conditions prescribed in sub-section 2 of section 271AAA have been fulfilled. It is also held that in respect of balance undisclosed income of Rs. 1,67,68,242/-, the AO has correctly levied the penalty u/s 271AAA as undisclosed to this explanation was neither offered in the return of income nor the due taxes

SMT. DINUMATIBEN DAMJIBHAI SHILU,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (2) (5), RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Judicial Member)

sections 234A/B/C was included therein amounting to Rs.1,02,679/- resulting in aggregate tax liability raised on the assessee of Rs.9,80,342/-. The said intimation was made on 17.11.2014. Thereafter on 31.8.2018, the assessee filed rectification application before the AO stating that his income returned for tax had been wrongly returned by including therein exempt income to the extent

HOLLIS VITRIFIED PRIVATE LIMITED,MORBI, GUJARAT, INDIA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT, INDIA

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 363/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Hollis Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Revenue Survey No. 756/P1/P1/P1, Opp. Tax-1, Rajkot Antique Granito, Ghuntu,-Lakhdhirpur Road, Morbi (Gujarat)-363642 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacch5628Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.8.5 In view of the above facts and material on record a detailed Show- Cause Notice (SCN) was sent to the assessee requiring him to explain as to why the unsecured loan amounting to Rs.11,17,22,379/-credited in his books of accountsis not considered as unexplained cash credit

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S RAMBOO PROLEN PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, ground number 8 of the Department’s appeal is dismissed

TDS was deducted on the reimbursement element. The AO disallowed the quantum of reimbursement element by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed expenditure amounting to " 31,02

THE DCIT, CIRCLE (TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. M/S. GOPAL SNACKS P. LTD., RAJKOT, VILLAGE METODA, TAL. LODHIKA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

TDS), Gopal Snacks Pvt. Rajkot Ltd. Plot No. G-2322 Vs to 2324, Metoda, (Appellant) GIDC Lodhika, Rajkot PAN: RKTGO1801C (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Hiren Shah, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 02-02-2023 Date of pronouncement : 10-02-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Revenue

ACTIONWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAJKOT vs. THE PCIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.317/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15 Actionware India Pvt. Ltd. The Pr.Cit-1 बनाम 316, Sagar Arcade Rajkot. Gandal Road Vs. Opp: Union Bank Of India Rajkot 360 002 (Gujarat) Pan : Aacck 3445 Q (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr

02,781/- taken by you from Dishman Carbogen Amcis Ltd as unexplained cash credits within the meaning of section 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961 as the genuineness of the transaction is not proved. 3.In this case the assessment order has been passed without making due inquiry/verification.Hence, in terms of Explanation 2 to sec. 263, such order is erroneous

ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GUJ-W-201-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.731/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing)

02 Income Total Income 6,82,230 6,82,230 detail 03 Tax Tax Liability after relief 50,904 2,91,613 details 04 Interest Total interest and Fee 8,537 56,990 and Fee (234A,234B,234C&234F) Payable 05 Pre-paid Total taxes paid (Advance 59,446 59,446 Taxes Tax, TDS, TCS, Self Assessment

M/S. SHIVABYAY PROJECT PVT. LTD. ,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

02-11-2023 Date of pronouncement : 08-11-2023 I.T.A Nos. 06 & 37/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 2 M/s. Shivabyay Project Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These are cross appeals filed by the Department and assessee for A.Y. 2014-15, arise from order of the CIT(A)-2, Rajkot dated

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. M/S. SHIVABYAY PROJECT PVT. LTD. , GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

02-11-2023 Date of pronouncement : 08-11-2023 I.T.A Nos. 06 & 37/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 2 M/s. Shivabyay Project Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These are cross appeals filed by the Department and assessee for A.Y. 2014-15, arise from order of the CIT(A)-2, Rajkot dated

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. SENOR METALS PVT. LTD., JAMNAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 260/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12

section 43(5). It is immaterial whether transaction is carried out at the recognized stock exchange or not. Even the circular of CBDT cited in the assessment order states that once it is established that the assessee has entered in the transaction of the commodity that they deal the other technical details have no material impact. Hence, this reasoning

DENA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK (BHUJ BRANCH),BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-4, , GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

TDS-4, Gandhidham- Station Road, Bhuj- Vs Kutch 370001 (Respondent) PAN No. AAAJD0596Q (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent by : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 20-06-2022 Date of pronouncement : 29-06-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed

A.C.I.T CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT vs. SANSKAR DEVELOPERS, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas cross objection (CO ) filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 242/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Assisstant Commissioner Of Income- Sanskar Developers Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajkot, Room No. 311, Shop No. 1, Shri Raj Complex, 1- Vs. 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Madhav Park, B/H. Vijay Hostel, Course Road, Rajkot – 360001 150Ft Ring Road, Rajkot – 360004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ackfs 2310 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 148 of the Act in a proper way. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also stated that initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act was bad in law. 16. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue, relied on the findings of the learned CIT(A), so far initiation of reassessment proceedings