ITAT Surat Judgments — February 2021

MR. SHASHIKANT VIRSUKHLAL CHAUHAN,SURAT vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(4), SURAT

ITA 40/SRT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed26 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) prayed for withdrawal of the appeal. The Departmental Representative had no objection. The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

BHOOMIBEN VIJAYKUMAR DESAI,SURAT vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR 3(3), SURAT

ITA 649/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed23 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI TAHIRHUSEN GULAMBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5), SURAT

ITA 130/SRT/2017[2011-12]Status: Disposed23 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had prayed for withdrawal of the appeal under the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. The Revenue did not object to the withdrawal.

SMT. SHARDABEN CHANDUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT

ITA 1310/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

THAKORBHAI DAYABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT

ITA 1438/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Dismissed

The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

SMT. KAMUBEN RAMESHBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT

ITA 1306/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Dismissed

The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

SHRI HARISHKUMAR CHANDRAKANTBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT

ITA 1307/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme.

SHRI AJAYBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(6), SURAT

ITA 1308/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed22 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI JAYRAJBHAI A. JODHANI,SURAT vs THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3), SURAT

ITA 2420/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Remanded

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to substitute the DVO's valuation without appreciating the negligible difference between the DVO's valuation and the assessee's declared value. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) should have considered the stamp duty valuation on the date of the agreement to sell.

SHRI ARVINDBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 615/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee prayed for withdrawal of the appeal and the Departmental Representative did not object. Consequently, the appeal was treated as withdrawn.

BHARAT VITHALBHAI NAVADIYA,SURAT vs ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 169/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The assessee's counsel requested to withdraw the appeal, and the Revenue representative had no objection. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

SHRI NATVARBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 614/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

SONALIBEN HARESHBHAI MEHTA,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(4), SURAT

ITA 1393/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI DHANSUKHBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(2), SURAT

ITA 617/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee prayed for withdrawal of the appeal and the Departmental Representative did not object. Consequently, the appeal was treated as withdrawn.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(1)(1), SURAT vs M/S. BHAVNA AUTO PUREINFRA PVT. LTD., SURAT

ITA 112/SRT/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal agreed that the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified by the CBDT circular. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed as not maintainable.

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), SURAT vs SAI KHATI ENTERPRISE, SURAT

ITA 598/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal agreed that the tax effect was below the monetary limit. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not admitted and was dismissed.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs M/S. HAPPY HOME CORPORATION, SURAT

ITA 125/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: Disposed18 Feb 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal acknowledged that the tax effect was below the monetary limit set by the CBDT circular. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue was not admitted and was dismissed.

SHRI JUGAL K. AGARWAL,SURAT vs THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, SURAT

ITA 868/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2007-08Dismissed

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw all appeals. This was based on the assessee settling all disputes, including the penalty, with the Revenue under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020.

SHRI JUGAL K. AGARWAL,SURAT vs THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT

ITA 2/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Dismissed

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw all appeals. This was based on the assessee settling all disputes, including the penalty, with the Revenue under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020.

SHRI JUGAL K. AGARWAL,SURAT vs THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, SURAT

ITA 869/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: Disposed17 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Dismissed

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw all appeals. This was based on the assessee settling all disputes, including the penalty, with the Revenue under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020.

BHARUCH ECO AQUA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE, BHARUCH

ITA 1298/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: Disposed10 Feb 2021AY 2005-06Dismissed

The assessee sought to withdraw the appeals as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

M/S. T. J. AGRO FERTILISERS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs THE PR. CIT, VALSAD

ITA 1033/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed10 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer, after conducting detailed enquiries as per the PCIT's direction, made no variation to the returned income. Since the assessee had no grievance against the fresh assessment order, the appeal was rendered infructuous.

M/S. SHRIPAD CONCHEM PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4, SURAT

ITA 2183/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: Disposed10 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Dismissed

The tribunal noted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. As there was no objection from the Revenue, the appeal was treated as withdrawn.

BHARUCH ECO AQUA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE, BHARUCH

ITA 1299/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: Disposed10 Feb 2021AY 2006-07Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHYAM FURNISHING PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2), SURAT

ITA 57/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed10 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

RADHEY KRISHNA TERENE PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1930/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Dismissed

The Tribunal allowed both parties to withdraw their respective appeals. Consequently, both the appeal filed by the revenue and the cross-appeal filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI UMESHKUMAR RAMDAS KAPISH,KOLKATTA vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), SURAT

ITA 818/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2009-10Dismissed

The Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs. 17,04,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposits. The assessee's appeal was dismissed.

AKSH DIAMONDS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), SURAT

ITA 3540/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.

POOJA TRENDZ PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), SURAT

ITA 569/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S CHAUDHARY PRINTS PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(2), SURAT

ITA 84/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

THE ITO, WARD-4(1), SURAT vs RADHEY KRISHNA TERENE PVT. LTD., SURAT

ITA 1855/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: Disposed5 Feb 2021AY 2010-11Dismissed

The Tribunal allowed both parties to withdraw their respective appeals. Consequently, both the appeal filed by the revenue and the cross-appeal filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI MUKESHHBHAI C. PATEL,SURAT vs THE PR. CIT-3, SURAT

ITA 1318/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed4 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw their respective appeals. Consequently, both appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S. K.N. DIAMOND,BILIMORA vs THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

ITA 1788/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed4 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Partly Allowed

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of foreign tour expenses due to insufficient evidence. However, regarding job work expenses, the Tribunal noted that the AO made an ad-hoc disallowance without proper verification, and the assessee had provided supporting documents and complied with TDS provisions.

R.S. TRADELINK PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4, SURAT

ITA 2130/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: Disposed4 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that the penalty was not leviable as the assessee had voluntarily offered the long term capital gain by revising the return upon being pointed out, indicating no conscious concealment. The Tribunal also noted inconsistencies in the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer.

SHRI HASMUKHBHAI C. PATEL,SURAT vs THE PR. CIT-3, SURAT

ITA 1317/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed4 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw their respective appeals. Consequently, both appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI ARVINDBHAI VALJIBHAI THUMAR,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(1), SURAT

ITA 311/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: Disposed3 Feb 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT vs M/S. KUBER METALS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 1156/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: Disposed3 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Dismissed

The tribunal considered the submissions of both parties. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed as not pressed due to the settlement under the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme.

AMRUTBHAI BHAGABHAI PATEL,NA

ITA 389/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: Disposed2 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were consequently dismissed as withdrawn.

THE PROGRESSIVE MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,DAMAN vs INCOME TAX OFFICER DAMAN WARD, DAMAN

ITA 694/SRT/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed2 Feb 2021AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

THE PROGRESSIVE MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,DAMAN vs DCIT, CIRCLE-VAPI, VALSAD

ITA 529/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: Disposed2 Feb 2021AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

THE PROGRESSIVE MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,DAMAN vs DCIT,CIRCLE-VAPI, VAPI

ITA 530/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed2 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals as the dispute was settled under the Vivad se Visvas Scheme, 2020. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

AMRUTBHAI BHAGABHAI PATEL,NA

ITA 390/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed2 Feb 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were consequently dismissed as withdrawn.