ALIUDEPUR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,ALIUDEPUR VILLAGE, TALUKA LATHI, DIST.: - AMRELI-365430 vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 143(1)(a)(v) in the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 such disallowances is possible under the 143(1) proceedings only from the Assessment Year 2022-23. I.T.A Nos. 269

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

269/-. The Assessing Officer further made addition under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act thereby disallowing Rs.1,64,65,840/- as the TDS was paid

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

269/-. The Assessing Officer further made addition under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act thereby disallowing Rs.1,64,65,840/- as the TDS was paid

THE ITO, WARD-2(2),, JAMNAGAR vs. SMT. SHITALBEN SAURABH VORA,, JAMNAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

section 80P(2)( d) of the Act. 8.2.3 In view of the detailed discussion above and respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court cited supra, as well as the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, Ahmedabad referred to above, the disallowance of Rs.1,86,33,269

M/S. SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT CO-OP. MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD. ,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE DCIT, SURENDRANAGR CIRCLE,, SURENDRANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

section 80P(2)( d) of the Act. 8.2.3 In view of the detailed discussion above and respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court cited supra, as well as the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, Ahmedabad referred to above, the disallowance of Rs.1,86,33,269

HARISHKUMAR MATHURADAS BARAI,DWARKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (4), DWARKA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 171/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Harishkumar Mathuradas Barai बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), V.M.Barai & Co. Okha Highway, Income Tax Office, Nr. Ambica /Vs. Varavala, Cinema, Hospital Road, Dwarka-361335 Jamnagar – 361335 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abtpb3824D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Appellant By :Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2025

269) and noted that none of the bill amount exceeds Rs.20,000/- therefore, we find that all payments were made by the assessee, within the permissible limit of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, hence, based on this factual position, addition made by the assessing officer needs to be deleted. ITA No. 171/RJT/2025 A.Y.15-16 Harishkumar M Barai

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. AMRUT CERAMICS,, MORBI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee both are dismissed

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The instant appeal of revenue and cross objection of the asssessee pertain to the common issue , therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are adjudicated together. I.T.A No. 373 & CO No.15 /Rjt/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 2 ACIT vs. M/s. Amrut Ceramics 3. The fact

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, MORBI vs. M/S. RANG CERA COAT, , MORBI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Rang Cera Coat, Ward-4, 8-A, National Highway, Morbi Morbi Pan :Aalfr 1616 A अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.01.2023

Section 131 of the Act had evidentiary value. The learned CIT(A) was convinced with the explanation of the assessee that the entire purchases could not be disallowed as being bogus noting the fact that being a trader and the sales having not been doubted, there was no question of corresponding purchases in relation to the said sales having

BHARTIBEN GAUTAMKUMAR BARAI,DWARKA vs. ITO WD-1, DWARKA, DWARKA, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.242/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Bhartiben Gautamkumar Vs Ito, Wd – 1, Barai, Dwarka – 361335 . Nr. Brahm Kund, Dwarka - 361335 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amnpb9005B (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of Rs. 5,00,000 made by ld.AO u/s.40A(3) of the Act. 3. Succinct facts are that assessee filed her 'Return of Income' for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16, on 15/03/2016, in ITR-4S, declaring total income of Rs.27,950/-. Subsequently, information was received that the Bhartiben Gautam Kumar Barai, assessee has made payments in cash

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S KRISHNA DEVELOPERS,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the ground raised by the assessee in the CO is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.620/Rjt/2014 With C.O.No.4/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 A.C.I.T., M/S.Krishna Developers, Circle-1, Business Centre, Vs. Junagadh. 1St Floor, Bus Station Road, Lal Bahadur Society, Junagadh.

disallowance made by the Ld.CIT (A) for Rs. 8 lacs is justifiable in the given facts and circumstances. 7.2 Regarding the rejection of the books of accounts, the provisions are contained under section 145(3) of the Act, which reads as under: 98[Method of accounting. 99 “(3) Where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness