THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. BHARUCH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. BHARUCH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

BHARUCH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.-OP. BANK LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHAURCH RANGE,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

BHARUCH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.-OP. BANK LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHAURCH RANGE,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. BHARUCH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

THE BHARUCH DIST.CENTRAL CO.OP.BANK LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

THE BHARUCH DIST.CENTRAL CO.OP.BANK LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of diminution of value of Govt. Securities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year, the assessee for the first time shifted its investment in certain government securities from HTM to AFS category. The action of shifting of such securities form one category to other was approved by the Board vide resolution dated 18/10/2008. Consequently

ALIDHARA TEXSPIN ENGINEERS,DADRA UT OF D & NH vs. THE ACIT., VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI

In the result, assessee`s appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.446/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Alidhara Texspin Engineers Assistant Commissioner Of Income Plot No.2, Block No.122,Vaghdhara Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi Vs. Road, Dadra "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifa 2434 N (Appellant ) (Respondent)

disallowance as per section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D was worked out by the assessing officer as follows: I. Expenses relating to the exempt income does not form part of the total income Rs.48,697/- …(I) II. Expenses by way of interest which are not directly attributable to any particular income or receipt or an amount computed in accordance with

HI CHOICE PROCESSORS PVT.LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2922/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2011-12 M/S. Hi Choice Processors Pvt. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. , 264 Gidc, Sachin Surat Income-Tax, Central Pan: Aaach 7062E Circle1, Surat अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

264 GIDC, Sachin Surat Income-Tax, Central PAN: AAACH 7062E Circle1, Surat अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Rasesh Shah, CA िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri O. P. Meena. Sr. D.R. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by 30.05.2018 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date of hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement on 05.06.2018 आदेश

SHANTAI EXIM LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, ITA.No.436/SRT/2018 of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, 1961, with effect from April 1, 1989, in order to obtain a deduction in relation to bad debts, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable; it is enough if the bad 38 ITA.Nos.273 & 436/SRT/2018 M/s. Shantai Exim Limited, Surat. debt

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT vs. SHANTAI EXIM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA.No.436/SRT/2018 of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, 1961, with effect from April 1, 1989, in order to obtain a deduction in relation to bad debts, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable; it is enough if the bad 38 ITA.Nos.273 & 436/SRT/2018 M/s. Shantai Exim Limited, Surat. debt

MADHVI AJITKUMAR RANKA ,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Madhvi Ajitkumar Ranka, Vs. Acit, 88, Sunder Nagar, Jamalpore, Navsari Circle, Navsari – 396445 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahfpr5791K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Darshit J. Naik, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

264/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s.143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued, requesting the assessee to furnish various details. The Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) observed that assessee has shown gift income of Rs.44,61,237/- and credited the same in her capital account. Therefore, to verify the genuineness of the gift

RAHUL KALUBHAI KAKADIA,VARACHHA vs. ITO, WARD 3(3)(4), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shri Rahul Kalubhai Kakadia Income Tax Officer 59,Vishnu Nagar-1, Ankur Ward-3(3)(4), Surat Vs Chowkdi, Nr. Mini Bazar, A.K.Road, Varachha, Surat- 395 008 Pan Aolpk 7873 G Nvbunha@Yahoo.Co.In Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

section 133(6) of the Act and deputed inspector of his ward to conduct enquiry and to serve notice. The Assessing Officer recorded that inspector furnished his report that the said party was not available on the given address. The A.O. issued show cause notice to the assessee for disallowance of such purchases. The assessee filed his reply and stated

THE ITO, WARD -2(2)(2),, SURAT vs. SMT. HANSABEN BIPIINKUMAR KOTHARI,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.613/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt.Hansaben Bipinkumar Kothari, Ward-2(2)(2), Surat. 806-C, Kanaknidhi Apartment, Timliawad, Nanpura, Surat. [Pan: Adgpk 1894 D] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri Sreenivas T.Bidari – Cit-Dr

disallowance on account of interest. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.AO the assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) considered the case of both the parties and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and deleted the additions. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the Revenue has filed this appeal before this

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. SHHLOK ENTERPRISE,, SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Shhlok Enterprise, Tax, Circle-2(3), Surat Block No.292, Plot No.135/B, Shhlok Arcede, Bamroli Road, Surat. Pan : Abufs8091E Appellant Respondednt

disallowance of interest expenses. The learned DR for the revenue submits that a survey was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 30th August 2013. During the survey action statement of one of the partner was recorded oath. The partner of assessee admitted to have received accommodation entry in the form of unsecured loan. The statement was given voluntarily

SHRI ANURAGRAIJI V. GOSWAMI,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1331/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 Anuragraji V. Goswami, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O. Yogesh B. Shah, Ward-5(1), Surat. 5/458, Haripura, Kaljug Street, Surat-395003 [Pan: Aajpt 4629 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

section 28(iv) of the Act. Similar finding was rendered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Dilip Kumar Roy v. CIT (1974) 94 ITR 1 (Bombay) whenever an amount is paid as personal gift for personal qualities of assessee and as token of personal esteem and veneration, it cannot be subjected to tax as income

JAYVADAN RUGHNATHWALA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2018-19

disallowance of the purchases the income from business is increased and therefore S 115BBE cannot be invoked. Even otherwise, the addition for alleged bogus purchases cannot be made u/s 69C as the payments for the purchases have been recorded in the books of accounts. It is to be noted that the assessing officer has not invoked section 115BBE

ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT vs. M/S. HI-CHOICE PROCESSORS P. LTD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Srt/2020 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Income Tax Officer, M/S. Hi-Choice Processors Pvt. Ward-1(1)(3), Room No.113, Vs. Ltd., 264, Gidc, Sachin, Surat- Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 394230. 395002 (""थ" /Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach7062E िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 31/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2023

264, GIDC, Sachin, Surat- Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- 394230. 395002 (""थ" /Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACH7062E िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent by Shri Mehul Shah, CA सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 31/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 18/04/2023 आदेश