THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80 IA(4) of the Act. 6. In appeal, the assessee challenged the validity of assessment framed under section 153A of the Act on the ground that at the time of search no incriminating documents were found so as to hold that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section

M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LIMITED.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80 IA(4) of the Act. 6. In appeal, the assessee challenged the validity of assessment framed under section 153A of the Act on the ground that at the time of search no incriminating documents were found so as to hold that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80IA of the Act. The basis of additions apparently may be inferred from the below observations made by Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order “Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80IA of the Act. The basis of additions apparently may be inferred from the below observations made by Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order “Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80IA of the Act. The basis of additions apparently may be inferred from the below observations made by Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order “Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80IA of the Act. The basis of additions apparently may be inferred from the below observations made by Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order “Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for Assessment

disallowed deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Act claimed by the assessee amounting to Rs. 3,95,76, 721/-. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the search action is without jurisdiction since it is not in dispute that at the time of search, no incriminating material was found in relation to this year

SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT

disallowances as per various provisions of the Income-tax Act for\nincurring cash expenses and violation of other provisions also needs to be\nconsidered before arriving at the value of real income earned from the uncounted\nShri Shamjibhai Shadabhai Kangad & Ors.\nIT(SS)A Nso.11 to 23/RJT/2022 and Ors. (AYs: 2011-12 to 2018-19 & Ors..)\n22\ntransactions recorded

THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT vs. SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, in IT(SS) No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.11 To 20/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner Of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Adepk 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.21 To 23/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2014-15, 2016-17 &2017-18 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta Kangad Vs. Estate”, 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, Rajkot-360001 Gandhidham-370 201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aabca 8202 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.15/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2019-20 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Hetab Shamjibhai Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bbz-South-60, Zanda Chowk, Vs. “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aqtpk 7484 M (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowances as per various provisions of the Income-tax Act for incurring cash expenses and violation of other provisions also needs to be considered before arriving at the value of real income earned from the uncounted Shri Shamjibhai Shadabhai Kangad & Ors. IT(SS)A Nso.11 to 23 /RJT/2022 and Ors. (AYs : 2011-12 to 2018-19 & Ors..) 22 transactions recorded

M/S OM KIRTI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roy)

disallowance of interest payment of Rs. 14,40,475 to 1C1CI bank made by the A.O. by treating it as personal expenditure. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in confirming addition of Rs. 2,28,990/- made by the assessing officer by way of unexplained investment in jewellery. 5.The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

disallowed than the ratio laid down\nby the various High Courts, regarding not taxing all the receipts would remain in\npapers only. Thus, with a view to strike a proper balance between the factual vis-\na-vis the legal aspects it is decided to further enhance the average net profit rate\nto 50%. Accordingly, the net unaccounted profit for this

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

disallowed than the ratio laid down\nby the various High Courts, regarding not taxing all the receipts would remain in\npapers only. Thus, with a view to strike a proper balance between the factual vis-\na-vis the legal aspects it is decided to further enhance the average net profit rate\nto 50%. Accordingly, the net unaccounted profit for this