SHRI KISHOR GORDHANBHAI JAKSANIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

251. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates whether the deposits made by the assessee in cash in his bank account reflects the unexplained cash credit under section 68

SHRI JAYANTILAL RUDABHAI BHALANI,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3), JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Jayantilal Rudabhai Bhalani Ito, Ward-1(3) Bilnath Krupa Vs Jamnagar. Opp: Khodiyar Colony Air Force Road, Nilkamal Colony Jamanagar 361 008. (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri S.S. Rathi, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

68 of the Act was part of contract receipt of Rs.15,75,250/-. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has sought for detailed break-up of gross 9 receipt of Rs.15,75,250/-, which the assessee has furnished. We have extracted such break-up hereinabove. This amount has two compartments, viz. contract receipt of Rs.10,00,000/- from five parties and remaining

THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, MORBI CIRCLE,, MORBI vs. M/S VIKAS SANITARYWARES,, MORBI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 396/Rjt/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014

section 68 of the Act by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Precision finance (p) Ltd reported in 208 ITR 465 wherein it was held as under: “It was for the assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. On the facts of this case

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SHRI HARESHKUMAR MANILAL SOMAIYA,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed, आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 191/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Shri Hareshkumar Manilal Somaiya, Circle-2, Vs. Prop Of Rohit Trading Co., Jamnagar. 3-B, Milap Chamber, Grain Market, Jamnagar.

68 of the Act by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. reported in 208 ITR 465 wherein it was held as under: “It was for the assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. On the facts of this case, the Tribunal

ABROAD VITRIFIED PVT LTD,MORBI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita Nos.144/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2018-19

68 of the Act. The prospective shareholders have managed their financial affairs by obtaining the funds from the friends and relatives, who were in position to lend to assist the assessee to raise the funds for the purpose of launching a big venture. In the assessee`s case, the assessing officer has passed the order in great detail, after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM vs. KAMLESH DEORAJ JAIN, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 594/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs. Kamlesh Deoraj Jain, Tax, Bbz-N-108, Khanna Market, Plot No. 20/A, Sector No. 8, Gandhidham, Gandhidham Gandhidham Gujarat 370201 Gujarat 370201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adopj1769Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sunil Maloo, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01 / 12 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/ 01 /2026

section 68 of the Act. The Assessee in replay to ACIT vs. Kamlesh Deoraj Jain notice submitted detail replay along with documentary evidence comprising served Annexures, in order to establishing the genuineness of the purchase transactions. Even after producing concrete documents, the Ld. AO proceed to rejected the books of accounts u/s 145(3) of the Income

SHRI NAVA UJALA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,AT NAVA UJALA, TALUKA KUNKAVAV, GUIJARAT-365450 vs. THE DCIT/ACIT(CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

251 of the Act.” 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A) denying assessee’s claim of exemption under section 80P of the Act, 6. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that CPC made adjustment to income of the assessee by denying assessee’s claim of I.T.A

SHRI TRAMBAKPUR SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,AT TRAMBAKPUR TALUKA DHARI DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT/ACIT (CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

251 of the Act.” I.T.A No. 23/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2019-20 Page No 6 Shri Trambakpur Sahkari Mandali Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT(CPC) 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A) denying assessee’s claim of exemption under section 80P of the Act, 6. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted

UMIYAJI STEEL INDUSTRIES,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT

The appeal is DISMISSED

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

68, Nr. Tulsi Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring . Forge, SIDC Main Road, Road, Veraval (Shapar) – 360024 Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAEFU1336R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR : 13/08/2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : 14/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 68 of the Act. ITA Nos.760 & 761/Rjt/2010 And CO No.32 & 33/Rjt/2010 M/s. Pavan Cosnt. Co. A.Ys. 2005-06 & 2006-07 6.1 The ld DR vehemently supported the order of AO. 7. On the other hand the ld. AR before us submitted that the amount from M/s. Sutreja & Co. was received by the assessee through banking channel. The amount

KUMAR RAMESH SAHU,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.336/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Kumar Ramesh Sahu बनाम/ The Acit, Sundaram, 72/3, New Cirtcle-2(3) Vs. College Wadi Rajkot – 60 001 150Ft5. Ring Road Opp. Meera Apartment Rajkot – 360 005 (Gujarat) "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aesps 5531 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 13/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha:

251/- u/s. 68 as discussed in para 11.1 Total Income... Rs. 42,04,261/- Rounded off to... Rs. Rs. 42,04,260/- The Assessing Officer assessed the income of Rs. 42, 04,260/- under Section

VALOUR AUTOPACK,GOR KHIJADIYA, MORBI GUJARAT vs. THE PR. CIT 1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

251 Guj, wherein it was held that once, the repayment is made and accepted by the department no addition for such loan is to be made. That is, if the loan has been repaid in subsequent years then no addition should be made in the hands of the assessee. 18. We note that as per learned PCIT, in fact, enquiry

KUNJAN JAGDISHCHANDRA SEDANI,JAMANGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.197/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Kunjan Jagdishchandra Sedani Principal Commissioner Of Vs. 18B, Parikunj, Mahavir Society, Income Tax, Jamnagar Room No. 101, 1St Floor Aayakar Bedi Bunder Road, Jamnagar- 361008 Bhavan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Jamnagar-361001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Erips2050H (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 23/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Dated 21.02.2025 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (In Short “Ld Pcit”), Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'), For The Assessment Year 2015- 16.Grievances Raised By The Assessee, Which, Being Interconnected, Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: 1. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit, Jamnagar Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Setting-Aside The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Even When The Order As Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interests Of The Revenue. 2. Hon'Ble Pr. Cit, Jamnagar Erred In Law & In Facts By Setting-Aside The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, Kunjan Jagdishchandra Sedani

68 whereas cash deposit in bank account by lenders is only Rs. 25,00,000/- as identified by Hon'ble Pr. CIT, Jamnagar himself. 2. The facts of the case which can be stated quite shortly are as follows: The return of income for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, was filed by the assessee, on 31/08/2016, declaring total income

OM LAMCOAT PVT LTD,MORBI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

68,212/-on account of alleged unexplained expenditure. The addition made is totally unjustified and uncalled for which deserves to be deleted may kindly be deleted. 3. Your Honour's assessee craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal” 3. Grounds of appeal raised

OM LAMCOAT PVT LTD,MORBI vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

68,212/-on account of alleged unexplained expenditure. The addition made is totally unjustified and uncalled for which deserves to be deleted may kindly be deleted. 3. Your Honour's assessee craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal” 3. Grounds of appeal raised

SHRI MILAP HARESHKUMAR SOMAIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAMNAGAR

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

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2016- 17. I.T.A No. 20/Rjt/2020 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No 2 Milap Hareshkumar Somaiya vs. Asst. CIT 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a doctor by profession and showing professional income, trading

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SIX TWENTY REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT

68,000/-). It is to mentioned that this figure not include the amount that has\nnot been received till the date of survey. however, would be received on later date\nbut before the execution of respective conveyance deed. The above impounded\ndocuments was shown to Shri Ashutosh Ganatara. From his statement recorded,\nit can be seen that Shri Ashutosh Ganatara

SIX TWENTY REALTY PVT LTD,RAJOT vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

68,000/-). It is to mentioned that this figure not include the amount that has\nnot been received till the date of survey. however, would be received on later date\nbut before the execution of respective conveyance deed. The above impounded\ndocuments was shown to Shri Ashutosh Ganatara. From his statement recorded,\nit can be seen that Shri Ashutosh Ganatara