HIRAVATI MARINE PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,,PORBANDAR vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2,, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2007-2008 Addl. Commissioner Of Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Income Tax, Vs Ltd. Range-2, Porbandar, Jamnagar. Pan No: Aabch2110C "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2008-2009

43 the only sections which can be made appli cable are either section 36 or 37. I have already stated above that the assessee-company's learned counsel is not relying on section 36 but is relying on section 37 and to me it appears that sections 28 and 29 read together do not show

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S HIRAVATI MARINE PRODUCTS (P) LTD.,, PORBANDAR

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2007-2008 Addl. Commissioner Of Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Income Tax, Vs Ltd. Range-2, Porbandar, Jamnagar. Pan No: Aabch2110C "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2008-2009

43 the only sections which can be made appli cable are either section 36 or 37. I have already stated above that the assessee-company's learned counsel is not relying on section 36 but is relying on section 37 and to me it appears that sections 28 and 29 read together do not show

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAKJOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

43,236/-, as there was error in considering gold and silver\nrate and mistake in calculation thereof. Accordingly total income revised at\nRs.61,87,59,134/-.\n8.\nThe Ld CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad in order No. CIT(A)-ll/C, C. 2/Raj/086-\nR/2017-18, dated 26.03.2018, granted relief to the assessee, aggregating to\nRs.50,18,25,184/-, in respect of various additions

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

43. In ground no.7, the assessee has challenged charging of interest under sections 234B/C/D. It is consequential in nature. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 26 44. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose 45. Now we take ITA No.390/Ahd/2013. In this appeal grievance of the assessee is that

GOPAL SNACKS PVT LTD ,RAJKOT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT

68 of unsecured loans\nreceived of Rs.85,00,000/-, ought to have considered the understated vital facts,\nbeing;\na) The exhaustive documentary evidences, being Ledger, Confirmation,\nPAN, Own bank statement, I.T return, bank statement and balance sheet\nof lenders and TDS certificate for interest payment to prove the identity,\ngenuineness and credit-worthiness of the lenders has not been disproved

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. SENOR METALS PVT. LTD., JAMNAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 260/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12

68 087 77 55 982 1 73 60 002 1 93 45 151 (Increase )/Decrease in stock Opening stock By product 1 28 206 2 86 589 Work in process 5 86 46 481 6 63 78 651 Finished goods 1 11 79 254 77 63 967 Total 6 99 53 941 7 44 29 207 Closing stock By product

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the amount of ₹68 lakhs was added to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT (A). ITA Nos.174/Rjt/2014 and 26 appeals Shri Dineshbhhai G.Jakasania vs. DCIT and 3 Other Groups AYs – 2005-06 to 2008-09 & 2010-11 & 2011-12 6. The assessee before

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the amount of ₹68 lakhs was added to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT (A). ITA Nos.174/Rjt/2014 and 26 appeals Shri Dineshbhhai G.Jakasania vs. DCIT and 3 Other Groups AYs – 2005-06 to 2008-09 & 2010-11 & 2011-12 6. The assessee before

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

section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the amount of ₹68 lakhs was added to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT (A). ITA Nos.174/Rjt/2014 and 26 appeals Shri Dineshbhhai G.Jakasania vs. DCIT and 3 Other Groups AYs – 2005-06 to 2008-09 & 2010-11 & 2011-12 6. The assessee before

SHRI RAJKOT DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD. RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: us, the error noted in the assessment order passed in the case of the assessee under Section 143(3) of the Act for the impugned year i.e. AY 2017-18 was that the assessee’s claim of deduction for creation of special reserve from the profit of “eligible business” as per Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act had been allowed in excess by the Assessing Officer without properly examining the calculation of the claim submitted by the assessee.

68,93,336/- should be disallowed on account of excess claim of deduction for creating special reserve u/s 36(1)(viii) and should be added to total income of assessee bank.” 5. Ld. Pr. CIT thereafter went on to hold the assessment order as erroneous causing prejudice to the Revenue for the Assessing Officer having not examined the claim

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.

43. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Admittedly, there is no relationship of principal and agent. In other words, there is no agency between the assessee and the alleged travel agents. Agency has been assumed by the AO with the help of section 194H of the Income