DIVA DIAMONDS PVT. LTD,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.128/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Diva Diamonds Pvt.Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), 302, Gokul Building, Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, 1St Room No.108, Floor, Surat-395007 Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.13/Srt/2020 [Arising In Ita No.128/Srt/2020] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Diva Diamonds Pvt.Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of 302, Gokul Building, Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, 1St Room No.108, Floor, Surat-395007 Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Applicant) (Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.313/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Diva Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Principal Cit-1,Surat 1St 302, Gokul Building, Room No.123, Floor, Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395007 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has restricted the addition at @ 5% of unverifiable purchases observing as follows: “8.8 In interest of principles of uniformity and consistency the same decision is taken in the instant appeal. The AR has also raised this

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.-3, SURAT vs. SH. HARESHBHAI MOHANBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No.01/Srt/2021 (Ay 2010-11) It(Ss)A No.09/Srt/2020 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Dineshchandra D Income-Tax, Central Circle- Koradia, 3Room No.507, 5Th Floor, 9/10, Dayanand Society, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura B/H.Navyug College, Gate, Surat-395001 Rander Road, Surat Pan No: Acupk 3696 A Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee

4. Against the merits of the additions the assessee submitted that the assessee availed unsecured loan from four parties namely Diasqua Exports, Paras Gems, Madhav Gems and AYs 10-11, 14-15, 15-16 & 17-18 Dineshchandra D Koradia, Nagjibhai M Sakariya & Sh. Hareshbhai M Sakariya Mayur Gems and furnished the opening and closing balance, details of interest paid

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ANAVIL BUSINESS CENTRE, ADAJAN vs. ABHISHEK NAVNIT DOSHI , MAHIDHARPURA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Ito, Abhishek Navnit Doshi, 405, Income Tax Office, Anavil 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Business Centre, Hazira Road, Vs. Jin Shanti Bldg. Mahidharpura, Adajan, Surat-395003. Surat-395009. Pan No. Afhpd 0064 M Appellant Respondent

68,292/– as unexplained investment under section 69 of the as unexplained investment under section 69 of the as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and made an addition of 100% of the purchases so found to be Act and made an addition of 100% of the purchases so found to be Act and made

REVA ENTERPRISE,ANKLESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(4), BHARUCH, BHARUCH

In the result, ITA No.259/SRT/2024 is partly allowed, ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.259, 380 & 414/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Reva Enterprises, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot No. 50, Gandhi Market, Ward – 2(4), Rajpipla Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch Sarangpore, Narmada - 393001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aanfr8509E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे/Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज"कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke (Sr. Dr) With Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

172 (Mad.) has held that amendment to section 115BBE increasing rate of tax on income referred to in section 68 from 30% to 60% with w.e.f. 01.04.2017 is not applicable to transactions prior to 01.04.2017. Hence, the enhanced rate is not applicable for AY 2017-18. Respectfully following the above decisions, the AO is directed

REVA ENTERPRISE,NARMADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), BHARUCH, BHARUCH

In the result, ITA No.259/SRT/2024 is partly allowed, ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.259, 380 & 414/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Reva Enterprises, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot No. 50, Gandhi Market, Ward – 2(4), Rajpipla Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch Sarangpore, Narmada - 393001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aanfr8509E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे/Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज"कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke (Sr. Dr) With Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

172 (Mad.) has held that amendment to section 115BBE increasing rate of tax on income referred to in section 68 from 30% to 60% with w.e.f. 01.04.2017 is not applicable to transactions prior to 01.04.2017. Hence, the enhanced rate is not applicable for AY 2017-18. Respectfully following the above decisions, the AO is directed

REVA ENTERPRISE,NARMADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), BHARUCH, BHARUCH

In the result, ITA No.259/SRT/2024 is partly allowed, ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.259, 380 & 414/Srt/2024 Assessment Years: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Reva Enterprises, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Vs. Plot No. 50, Gandhi Market, Ward – 2(4), Rajpipla Road, Ankleshwar, Bharuch Sarangpore, Narmada - 393001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aanfr8509E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे/Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज"कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke (Sr. Dr) With Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

172 (Mad.) has held that amendment to section 115BBE increasing rate of tax on income referred to in section 68 from 30% to 60% with w.e.f. 01.04.2017 is not applicable to transactions prior to 01.04.2017. Hence, the enhanced rate is not applicable for AY 2017-18. Respectfully following the above decisions, the AO is directed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. SHYAM CORPORATION, SURAT

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roydcit, Vs. M/S. Shyam Corporation, Circle - 3, “Silver Crest”, F.P. No.67 & Surat 70, T.P.S. No.14(Pal), Pal, Surat -395 005. [Pan No. Abefs 9360 G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

172 (SC), such undisclosed income to the tune of Rs.1 lac was added to the income of the assessee u/s 68, 69, 69C of the Act. ITA No.571/A/12 DCIT vs. Shyam corporation Asst.Year – 2008-09 In appeal, the Learned CIT(A) considered the fact that the assessee does not have any other income other than the said business of construction

ACIT, CIR-1(3), SURAT vs. PRAVIN PANNALAL SHAH, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Pravin Pannalal Shah Lal Bunglow, Athwalines, Income-Tax, Circle-1(3, Vs. Surat-395007 Room No.301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Centre, Hajira Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrps 1045 H (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

4) Subject-matter (5) The Transfer (6) Acceptance. It was observed by ld CIT(A) that the assessee submitted the gift declaration/copy of gift deed before the Assessing Officer which is duly ITA No.289/SRT/2022 A.Y. 14-15 Pravin P Shah signed by the donor and donee. On, going through the said declaration, it is also apparent and patent

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. WESTERN INDIA COSTRUCTION,, DAMAN

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

4 National Electricals 5 Shree Sai Transport Opening Balance Rs. 8,53,500/-. Payment made Rs.3,00,000/- in this year. There is no new credit transaction in the year of appeal. 6 Kesar Steel Suppliers There is no new credit transaction in the year Assessment Years.2011-12 Western India Construction [ 7 Ambica Steel under appeal. Payment of old credit balance

LATE SHRI BHIMSEN DARBARILAL ARORA,,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, SURAT

In the result, ground no.4 raised by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1706/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora Through, Vs. The Acit, Circle-5, L/H. Rajat Bhimsen Arora, Surat. Smt. Mamta Bhimsen Arora, A-201, Madhulika Apartment, Bhatar Road, Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acaps9230L

4 The PCIT-5 vs. M/s. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. TTANO. 1297 OF 2015 (Bombay High Court) 5 ShilpiJewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India &Ors. WRIT PETITION NO. 3540 OF 2018 (Bombay High Court) 6 CIT in Vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani 355 ITR 172 (Gujarat) 7 Micro Inks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2017] 79 taxmann.com 153 (Gujarat) 8 Shakti

SHRI VIMALCHAND JAIN,,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(5),, SURAT

In the result the ground No

68 and 69C of the Income Tax Act. The entire purchases shown on the basis of fictitious invoices have been debited in the trading account since the transaction has been found to be bogus. The Tribunal having once come to a categorical finding that the amount of Rs.2,92,93,288/- represented alleged purchases from ''bogus suppliers

ARUN KUMAR GUPTA, DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), SURAT, ADAJAN vs. CHUNIBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA, ADARSH NAGAR SOCIETY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

68 of the Act was deleted. He also deleted the addition u/s 69C of the Act Rs.64,78,080/- in respect of unexplained commission paid on account of above LTCG. The CIT(A) has placed reliance on more than 50 decisions including the decisions as follows: (i) Shri Jitenddra Dalpatbhai Shah (ITA No.3105/Ahd/2009 ); (ii) CIT vs. Jitendra Dalpatbhai Shah

ARUN KUMAR GUPTA, DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), SURAT, ADAJAN vs. CHUNIBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA, ADARSH NAGAR SOCIETY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

68 of the Act was deleted. He also deleted the addition u/s 69C of the Act Rs.64,78,080/- in respect of unexplained commission paid on account of above LTCG. The CIT(A) has placed reliance on more than 50 decisions including the decisions as follows: (i) Shri Jitenddra Dalpatbhai Shah (ITA No.3105/Ahd/2009 ); (ii) CIT vs. Jitendra Dalpatbhai Shah

KANAIYALAL LABHUBHAI NAROLA,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,(2), SURAT, SURAT

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

4 of this order. He has relied upon the decisions\nof the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in cases of Nishant Vilas Kumar Parekh\n(supra), Kaushaliya Shampatlal Dudani (supra), Vilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF (supra),\nBhanuben Mansukhlal Khimashia (supra), and Sameeer Gulabchand Shah HUF\n(supra). We do not find infirmity in the decision of CIT(A). At the stage

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

172 pertain to correspondence regarding search carried out by Commercial Tax Department. On perusal of these documents, it revealed that the company had made purchases from the family concerns of the employee of the assessee company Shri Shailesh Damor. All the concerns are operated from the residential address of Shri Shailesh Damor, 56, Poonam Nagar Society, Bhatar Road, Surat

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

172 pertain to correspondence regarding search carried out by Commercial Tax Department. On perusal of these documents, it revealed that the company had made purchases from the family concerns of the employee of the assessee company Shri Shailesh Damor. All the concerns are operated from the residential address of Shri Shailesh Damor, 56, Poonam Nagar Society, Bhatar Road, Surat

SHRI SHAKTI G. KARNAWAT,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2007-08

4 5. By taking us through these reasons, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that assessment was reopened for the reasons that the assesse had availed unsecured loans of Rs.10,13,41,508/- from these four concerns. However, in the assessment order, the ld.AO has not made any addition under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained

THE ITO, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT vs. SHRI SHAKTI G. KARNAWAT,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2007-08

4 5. By taking us through these reasons, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that assessment was reopened for the reasons that the assesse had availed unsecured loans of Rs.10,13,41,508/- from these four concerns. However, in the assessment order, the ld.AO has not made any addition under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained

MUKESH BABULAL PARLECHA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(8), SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees (ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.225 & 226/Srt/2019 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mukesh Babulal Parlechav, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), 201, Panchratna Appartment, Dalgiya Surat. Mohalla, Mahidharpura, Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Apopp4334F (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.266 & 267/Srt/2019 Assessment Years: (2013-14 To 2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), Vs. Mukesh Babulal Parlechav, Surat. 201, Panchratna Appartment, Dalgiya Mohalla, Mahidharpura, Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Apopp4334F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) & Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25/07/2022

68,513 4,07,815 Closing Capital 4,07,815 10,27,593 Average Capital 4,88,164 7,17,704 Net profit 5,75,839 7,34,387 ROI (NP / Average Capital) (%) 117.96% 102.32% b. The purchases have entered the stock register and if the impugned purchases are excluded then the closing stock results into negative balance which