M/S PREMJI VALJI & SONS,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 125/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2017-2018 M/S Premji Valji & Sons, The Principal Commissioner Of “Kuvarjibhai Tower”, Vs. Income Tax, Palace Road, Rajkot-1, Rajkot. Rajkot. Pan: Aacfp7696K

disallowance may not be made for default (I any). 18. Details of cash deposited during the year in following format

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance in the assessment proceedings; Hence, such ‘illegal cash payment transactions” is added and abetted by the assessee and his associates whereby the purchaser deposits

SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,,JUNAGADH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(2)(4),, RAJKOT

disallowance in the assessment proceedings; Hence, such 'illegal cash payment transactions” is added and abetted by the assessee and his associates whereby the purchaser deposits

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2),, RAJKOT

disallowance in the assessment\nproceedings; Hence, such 'illegal cash payment transactions” is added and abetted by the\nassessee and his associates whereby the purchaser deposits

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

cash deposited during the year under consideration. As such, the mere action of the AO to reject the books of accounts is bad in law in view of the following case laws: - “i. Shri Jeen Mata Buildcon (P.) Ltd. V. Income-tax Officer [2022] 142 taxmann.com 544 (Jaipur - Trib.). Section 145, read with sections 68 and 133, of the Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR vs. SHRIMATI RAJ RANI ARORA, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

deposit of cash by the depositors in their bank account stand proved beyond any reasonable doubt as the depositors had sufficient cash in hand which was withdrawn from the bank. Moreover, the depositors had been paid interest by the assessee @12% and tax was duly deducted therefrom and the principle amount with interest has been paid back in the succeeding

BHARATKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHATIYA,,RAJKOT vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT

disallowance in the assessment\nproceedings; Hence, such 'illegal cash payment transactions” is added and abetted by the\nassessee and his associates whereby the purchaser deposits

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2,, JUNAGADH vs. SHRI DAMJIBHAI LEKHRAJBHAI THAVRANI,, JUNAGADH

disallowance in the assessment\nproceedings; Hence, such 'illegal cash payment transactions” is added and abetted by the\nassessee and his associates whereby the purchaser deposits