SHREE SAMARTH SWITCHGEAR AND TRANSMISSION PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

unexplained stock has been purchased. Accordingly, you have offered gross disclosure of amount of Rs.65,25,851/-, in the return of income filed for the year under consideration” 15.In response to the above show -cause notices, the assessee, submitted written submissions before the ld.Pr.CIT and explained, the issues raised by the ld. PCIT.About the stock difference in the valuation

SHREE SAMARTH ELECTRICALS PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

unexplained stock has been purchased. Accordingly, you have offered gross disclosure of amount of Rs.65,25,851/-, in the return of income filed for the year under consideration” 15.In response to the above show -cause notices, the assessee, submitted written submissions before the ld.Pr.CIT and explained, the issues raised by the ld. PCIT.About the stock difference in the valuation

ASHVIN DINESHBHAI JADAV,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

money to M/s. Angel Broking Pvt. Ltd. Further, he also stated therein that, these accepted deposits were to be repaid in future to the depositors. Since, details mentioned in the furnished list of depositors were incomplete in order to verify the identity genuineness & creditworthiness of the lender/depositors. Thus, assessee was requested to furnish complete postal address and other details

M/S. SIMERO VITRIFIED P. LTD. ,MORBI vs. THE PR. CIT-3 , RAJKOT

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

Bench: Us Is A Private Limited Company & Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Vitrified Tiles. The Return Of Income Has Been E-Filed By The Assessee, On 10/09/2016 For Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17, Reporting Loss Of Rs. 5,68,00,829/-, Which Was Later Revised On 09/03/2018, Declaring Total Loss Of Rs. 13,97,40,413/-, Claiming Investment Allowance U/S 32Ac Of The Income Tax Act. The Case Has Been Selected For Complete Scrutiny (Cass) Specifically To Examine The Followings: 1) Whether Outward Foreign Remittance Is From Disclosed Sources & Appropriate Withholding & Reporting Obligation Have Been Complied With; 2) Whether Investment & Income Relating To Properties Are Duly Disclosed; 3) Whether Receipt Of Foreign Remittance Has Been Correctly Offered For Tax And, 4) Whether Sundry Creditors Are Genuine. 4. The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17 Was Passed By Dcit, Morbi Circle, Morbi, Being The Assessing Officer (Ao), On 21/12/2018, Allowing The Loss Claimed Of Rs. 13,97,40,413/- To Be Carry Forward To Subsequent Years. 2

money in their hands either through cash or through cheque and the veracity and genuineness of huge loans taken by them, without making interest payment for years together, for investing/ giving loans to the assesses- company and others. The Trade creditors shall also be properly verified. Further, the bills/ vouchers of the new Plant & M/c installed, on which investment allowance

M/S. GREEN EARTH BIOGAS PVT. LTD.,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.185/Rjt/2023

unexplained. Thus, it is apparent that the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dated 30.09.2019 is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 13. Therefore, learned PCIT had issued a show cause notice to the assessee, on 19.01.2021, to explain the above transactions, and to furnish the following evidences, before the learned PCIT

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SMT. MANISHABEN N. MASHRU,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavsr.No.

depreciation on cars. We have confirmed similar disallowance in the Asstt.Years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. Possibility of personal user of telephone, car etc. could not be ruled out, and the ld.CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the disallowance. 49. In the assessee’s appeal, no other grounds remain to be adjudicated, hence, we treat this appeal as partly

THE ITO, WARD 1(3), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S PAVAN CONSTRUCTION CO, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal to ld. CIT(A). The assessee before the ld CIT(A) filed a reconciliation statement justifying the difference observed by the AO for Rs.50,00,000/-. The copy of the reconciliation statement reads as under: Debit Credit

PALLAV,JAMNAGAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Act. 7.Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us. 8. Learned Counsel for the assessee, argued that reasons recorded by the assessing officer for reopening of assessment are bad in law and there is no application of mind by the assessing officer. Therefore, the re- assessment

RAJSHANTI METALS PVT. LTD.,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE PR. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX,, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 176/Rjt/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 Rajshanti Metals Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Commissioner Of B-42, Gidc, Vs. Income Tax, Shankar Tekri, Jamnagar. Jamnagar.

money transactions. It was on account of these findings that the Tribunal was prompted to reverse the order of revision. No question of law arises. Tax Appeal is dismissed” 8.6 The Supreme Court in the another recent case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-2, Meerut v. Canara Bank Securities Ltd[2020] 114 taxmann.com 545 (SC), dismissed the Revenue