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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarasstt.Year :2012-13 Dcit, Cir.1(1) M/S.Aryan Arcade P.Ltd. Rajkot. Vs C/O. Milestone Property Mg Basement Grant Central Mall Rajkot.

house property as per provisions of section 24(b) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (the Act), d) Again reiterate the fact that, as discussed earlier in show cause and our contention, we submit that, there was introduction of capital in the form of OFCD to pay the OUTSTANDING LIABILITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF MALL BUILDING. To justify our claim

MISS PARI ANIL GANDHI, RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

D-mat account. Further, it has been mentioned that all details\nregarding the purchase/sale of shares i.e. evidence of purchase of shares, evidence\nof payment for purchase of shares made by way of account payee cheque, copy of\nbank statement, copy of balance sheet disclosing investments, copy of demat account\nstatement reflecting purchases, evidence of sale of shares through stock

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. GYANGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar

D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER These are appeals filed by the Revenue against common order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the ld.CIT(A)-III, Rajkot relating to the Asst.Year 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since common issues are raised in both the appeals, for the sake of convenience, we dispose of them by this common order. 2. Brief

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. GYANGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar

D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER These are appeals filed by the Revenue against common order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the ld.CIT(A)-III, Rajkot relating to the Asst.Year 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since common issues are raised in both the appeals, for the sake of convenience, we dispose of them by this common order. 2. Brief

SMT. JANKI KISHAN HINGORANI,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt.Janki Kishan Hingorani The Pr.Cit 6/7, Subham Complex Rajkot-1 Royal Park, University Road बनाम/ Rajkot Rajkot – 380 006 Vs. Gujarat (Appellant ) ( Respondent ) Pan: Pan : Aahph 4774M Assessee By Ms.Amrin Pathan, Ld.Ar Revenue By Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/12/2023

D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Learned Pr.Commissioner of Income-Tax, Rajkot-1 [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT” for short] dated 17/02/2021 in exercise of his revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

LATE SMT. PRITI A. GANDHI L/R. SHRI ANILBHAI A. GANDHI, RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

D-mat account. Further, it has been mentioned that all details\nregarding the purchase/sale of shares i.e. evidence of purchase of shares, evidence\nof payment for purchase of shares made by way of account payee cheque, copy of\nbank statement, copy of balance sheet disclosing investments, copy of demat account\nstatement reflecting purchases, evidence of sale of shares through stock

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

d) Ground No.1 in revenue`s appeal in ITA No. 366/RJT/ 2017, for assessment year 2013–14 at Rs.1,13,85,927/-. 31. We note that issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, in assessee`s own group case, in ITA No.IT(SS)A No.135/Ahd/2016, Kandla Exports Corporation, order dated 28.02.2025. The arguments

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

d) Ground No.1 in revenue`s appeal in ITA No. 366/RJT/ 2017, for assessment year 2013–14 at Rs.1,13,85,927/-. 31. We note that issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, in assessee`s own group case, in ITA No.IT(SS)A No.135/Ahd/2016, Kandla Exports Corporation, order dated 28.02.2025. The arguments

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

d) Ground No.1 in revenue`s appeal in ITA No. 366/RJT/ 2017, for assessment year 2013–14 at Rs.1,13,85,927/-. 31. We note that issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, in assessee`s own group case, in ITA No.IT(SS)A No.135/Ahd/2016, Kandla Exports Corporation, order dated 28.02.2025. The arguments

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

d) Ground No.1 in revenue`s appeal in ITA No. 366/RJT/ 2017, for assessment year 2013–14 at Rs.1,13,85,927/-. 31. We note that issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, in assessee`s own group case, in ITA No.IT(SS)A No.135/Ahd/2016, Kandla Exports Corporation, order dated 28.02.2025. The arguments

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S KUTCH SALT & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LTD.,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

d) Ground No.1 in revenue`s appeal in ITA No. 366/RJT/ 2017, for assessment year 2013–14 at Rs.1,13,85,927/-. 31. We note that issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, in assessee`s own group case, in ITA No.IT(SS)A No.135/Ahd/2016, Kandla Exports Corporation, order dated 28.02.2025. The arguments

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

D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: In this bunch of appeals two appeals were filed by the Revenue against the orders dated 30.10.2015 & 14.05.2015 passed by passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Rajkot for A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2011-12 respectively and the ITA Nos.27/RJT/2016& 360,315/Rjt/2015 A.Y.2011-12,2012-13 assessee has come up against the order 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

D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: In this bunch of appeals two appeals were filed by the Revenue against the orders dated 30.10.2015 & 14.05.2015 passed by passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Rajkot for A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2011-12 respectively and the ITA Nos.27/RJT/2016& 360,315/Rjt/2015 A.Y.2011-12,2012-13 assessee has come up against the order dated

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

D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: In this bunch of appeals two appeals were filed by the Revenue against the orders dated 30.10.2015 & 14.05.2015 passed by passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Rajkot for A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2011-12 respectively and the ITA Nos.27/RJT/2016& 360,315/Rjt/2015 A.Y.2011-12,2012-13 assessee has come up against the order dated

ANILBHAI CHUNILAL BHAYANI,,OKHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, DWARKA

In the result, both appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.363/Rjt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Anilbhai Chunilal Bhayani Ito, Ward-1(4) C/O. J.C. & Co., Dwarka. Vs Okha Port, Okha – 361 350. Pan : Abvpb 6284 D

d. Assessee could not furnish a single evidence that can prove that said expenditure incurred by him. 3. Hon. C1T(A) has considered the submission made by appellant and allowed expenses of Rs. 3,10,710/- to be set off against income from other sources and also allowed interest on loan for house property of Rs. 1,05,788/-. However

ASHWINBHAI CHUNILAL BHAYANI,,OKHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, DWARKA

In the result, both appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.363/Rjt/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Anilbhai Chunilal Bhayani Ito, Ward-1(4) C/O. J.C. & Co., Dwarka. Vs Okha Port, Okha – 361 350. Pan : Abvpb 6284 D

d. Assessee could not furnish a single evidence that can prove that said expenditure incurred by him. 3. Hon. C1T(A) has considered the submission made by appellant and allowed expenses of Rs. 3,10,710/- to be set off against income from other sources and also allowed interest on loan for house property of Rs. 1,05,788/-. However

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

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

property or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested. Sec.31 admission not conclusive prove but may estop:- Admissions are not conclusively proof of the matter admitted but they may operate as a stoppage under the provisions hereinafter contained. 11. Thereafter kind attention of Hon’ble ITAT

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

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

property or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested. Sec.31 admission not conclusive prove but may estop:- Admissions are not conclusively proof of the matter admitted but they may operate as a stoppage under the provisions hereinafter contained. 11. Thereafter kind attention of Hon’ble ITAT

PRANAM ENTERPRISE,JUNAGADH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.391/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Pranam Enterprise Vs. The Dcit Office No.3, City Centre, Opp. Circle-1(1), Rajkot New Collector Office, Junagadh – 362001, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffp7926H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar Respondent By Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am:

housing projects in order to avail excess deduction of Section 80IB(10) of the Act.In itself, such a claim is a misrepresentation of facts which would have succeeded but for selection of case in scrutiny and detection thereof in assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) was of the view that misrepresentation has led to underreporting of income, therefore, ld.CIT(A), confirmed