ITAT Rajkot Judgments — 2020

Judgments from the Rajkot bench in 2020

Showing 40 of 142 orders. Use the months below for the rest.

• Ojas Jaysukhlal Dave, Rajkot vs Dy. Commr. Income Tax, Inter. Taxa., Rajkot
  ITA 299/RJT/2018[2009-10]Status: Disposed16 Dec 2020AY 2009-10Withdrawn

  The Tribunal considered the assessee's application for withdrawal of the appeal under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to seek restoration if the scheme benefits could not be availed for bonafide reasons.

• The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Morbi… vs M/S Italica Floor Tiles Ltd., Morbi
  ITA 271/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Dec 2020AY 2012-13Withdrawn

  The Tribunal noted the assessee's submission that the dispute was settled under the VSV Scheme. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

• Jyotshnaben Chandrakant Barot, Jamnagar vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Porbandar
  ITA 417/RJT/2018[.2015-16]Status: Disposed9 Dec 2020Dismissed

  The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to seek restoration if the VSV scheme benefits could not be availed for bonafide reasons.

• Sunhill Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Dy. Commr. Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1(1)…
  ITA 49/RJT/2017[2010-11]Status: Disposed9 Dec 2020AY 2010-11Dismissed

  The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn based on the assessee's written request. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the VSV scheme benefits for bonafide reasons.

• Neha Jayeshkumar Barot, Jamnagar vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Jamnagar
  ITA 374/RJT/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed9 Dec 2020AY 2015-16Dismissed

  The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. It was noted that if the assessee fails to avail the VSV scheme for bonafide reasons, they can seek restoration of the appeal.

• M/S. Mital Copper Industries, Shaper… vs The ITO, Ward-1 (1) (1), Rajkot
  ITA 178/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2013-14Dismissed

  The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration of the appeal if they failed to avail the benefits of the VSV Scheme for bonafide reasons.

• Smt. Mamtaben Sanjaykumar Makadiya… vs The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot
  ITA 13/RJT/2019[2010-11]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2010-11Dismissed

  The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn based on the assessee's written request to avail the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the scheme for bonafide reasons.

• Smt. Mamtaben Sanjaykumar Makadiya… vs The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot
  ITA 14/RJT/2019[2011-12]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2011-12Dismissed

  The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn based on the assessee's written request to avail the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the scheme for bonafide reasons.

• Hansaben Mahendrabhai Faldu, Morbi vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Morbi
  ITA 121/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2013-14Dismissed

  The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the assessee's decision to participate in the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the scheme's benefits for bonafide reasons.

• Dharmendra Virjibhai Vahdadiya, Morbi vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Morbi
  ITA 247/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2013-14Dismissed

  The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of the appeal as requested by the assessee. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the VSV Scheme for bonafide reasons.

• The ITO, Ward-3(1), Jamnagar vs Shri Mohanlal K. Jain, Jamnagar
  ITA 344/RJT/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed3 Dec 2020AY 2006-07Dismissed

  The Tribunal acknowledged the applicability of the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which sets monetary limits for appeals. As the tax effect in this case did not exceed the revised limit, the appeal was dismissed.

• The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Morbi… vs M/S Motto Tiles Pvt. Ltd., Morbi
  ITA 306/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Nov 2020AY 2012-13Dismissed

  The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal was hit by the CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019, which sets monetary limits for filing appeals. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

• The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(2)… vs M/S D.M.L. Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat
  ITA 360/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: Disposed28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12Partly Allowed

  The Tribunal held that contract cancellation charges were part of the regular export business and not speculation. It also held that commission paid to non-residents for services rendered outside India was not subject to TDS under Section 195, thus disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was not justified.

• The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(2)… vs M/S Dml Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat
  ITA 27/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed28 Jul 2020AY 2012-13Partly Allowed

  The Tribunal held that contract cancellation charges were part of the regular export business and not speculation. It also held that commission paid to non-residents for services rendered outside India was not subject to TDS under Section 195, thus disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was not justified.

• M/S. D.M.L. Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…
  ITA 315/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: Disposed28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12Partly Allowed

  The Tribunal held that contract cancellation charges were part of the regular export business and not speculation. It also held that commission paid to non-residents for services rendered outside India was not subject to TDS under Section 195, thus disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was not justified.

• Shri Anil Abhubhai Odedara, Jamnagar vs The ITO, Ward-3(1), Jamnagar
  ITA 141/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed29 Jun 2020AY 2013-14Allowed

  The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed when the addition to income was made on an estimated basis. The penalty order was silent on how satisfaction for concealment or inaccurate particulars was arrived at.

• Naresh Kantilal Acharya, Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)…
  ITA 479/RJT/2011[2008-09]Status: Disposed8 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
• The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen… vs Shri Samir Kamruddin Makhani, Rajkot-Gujarat
  ITA 423/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• Shri Samir Kamruddin Makhani, Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen…
  ITA 439/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen.Cir.-1, Rajkot vs Rukshana Makhani, Rajkot
  ITA 422/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• Rukshana Makhani, Rajkot vs The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax…
  ITA 436/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• Kamrudin Makhani, Rajkot vs The Assistant Commr of Income Tax, Cen…
  ITA 440/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• Dy. Commr of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1, Rajkot vs Kamrudin Makhani, Rajkot
  ITA 420/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed4 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
• M/S. Ketan Construction Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2…
  ITA 219/RJT/2015[2005-06]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2005-06
• M/S. Ketan Construction Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2…
  ITA 221/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
• The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs M/S. Ketan Construction Limited…
  ITA 199/RJT/2015[2005-06]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2005-06
• The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs M/S. Ketan Construction Limited…
  ITA 201/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
• The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs M/S. Ketan Construction Limited…
  ITA 202/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2009-10
• M/S. Ketan Construction Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2…
  ITA 220/RJT/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2006-07
• The ACIT, Cen. Cir.-2, Rajkot-Gujarat vs M/S. Ketan Construction Limited…
  ITA 200/RJT/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2006-07
• M/S. Ketan Construction Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2…
  ITA 222/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed3 Jun 2020AY 2009-10
• M/S Rudraksh Detergent & Chemical Pvt… vs The Assistant Commr. Income Tax, Gandhidham…
  ITA 312/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2010-11Dismissed

  The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide evidence of the road's prior existence, making it impossible to determine if the expenditure was for repair or new construction. Consequently, the expenditure was considered capital in nature.

• Shri Dilipbhai U.Udani, Rajkot, Jamnagar vs The Commissioner of Income Tax-III…
  ITA 251/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2009-10Allowed

  The Tribunal held that the AO could not substitute the value of the capital asset as on April 1, 1981, under Section 55A of the Act, as the assessee had claimed a higher value based on a registered valuer's estimate, and the AO did not have the power to do so in such circumstances.

• Bharat Narshibhai Patel, Rajkot-Gujarat vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)…
  ITA 516/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2010-11Remanded

  The Tribunal held that if the recipient of the interest income has offered it to tax, no disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) should be made. The matter was remanded to the AO to verify this fact.

• The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Cen… vs M/S Siyaram Metals Pvt. Ltd., Jamnagar
  ITA 227/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
• Rameshwar Pipe Industries, Kotharia vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Rajkot
  ITA 340/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2013-14Allowed

  The Tribunal held that once a loan is repaid, addition under Section 68 is not permissible. Satisfied with the repayment documents, the addition was deleted.

• M/S. Bhaiya Transport P. Ltd., Rajkot… vs The Deputy Commissioner of Incometax…
  ITA 65/RJT/2019[2008-09]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2008-09
• Shri Khijadiya Juth Khetvishayak Sahakari… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1) (5)…
  ITA 55/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2012-13
• Varshaben Nitinbhai Moliya, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1) (4)…
  ITA 60/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2014-15
• Shri Mayankbhai P. Parekh (HUF)… vs The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham
  ITA 90/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed2 Jun 2020AY 2012-13