PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/-\non\ndisallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid\nto Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said\namount as expenses without deducting TDS

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/-\non\ndisallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid\nto Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said\namount as expenses without deducting TDS

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACTIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/-\non disallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid\nto Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said\namount as expenses without deducting TDS

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAKJOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/-\non\ndisallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid\nto Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said\namount as expenses without deducting TDS

M/S COBRA KCL JV,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, TDS- CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

TDS Circle, Rajkot whereby imposing penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law.” 3. The Assessing

SHREE KARMAL KOTADA JUTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.328/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2009-10) (Hybrid Hearing) Shree Karmal Kotadajuth Seva Vs. The Ito Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot. Sahakarimandali Limited. Karmal Kotada, Rajkot.

penalty proceedings, assessee’s case was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and assessing officer made addition based on form 26AS of its entire receipts mentioned in form 26AS, which was restricted by CIT(A) at 2% to 7,64,640/-, and also directed to allow TDS

M/S. ARRONE CERAMIC,AT VAGHASIYA, TALUKA WAKANER vs. THE JCIT TDS RANGE, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

penalty u/s.271C even though no order u/s.201 (1) has been passed by the Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, TDS Range

BHARAT NARSHIBHAI PATEL,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Us.

penalty provision for tax withholding lapse but it is a provision introduced to compensate any loss to the revenue in cases where deductor hasn’t deducted TDS

BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty proceedings. I hope that your honour will do the needful in the matter and oblige. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, For Backbone Projects Pvt. Ltd, Jayantilal M Jakasania) M.D. 11.2. Further in the Return of Income filed by the assessee on 07- 09-2012, the Return of Income resulted in a refund of Rs. 33,00,130/- after taking into

THE ASSTT. DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

penalty proceedings. I hope that your honour will do the needful in the matter and oblige. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, For Backbone Projects Pvt. Ltd, Jayantilal M Jakasania) M.D. 11.2. Further in the Return of Income filed by the assessee on 07- 09-2012, the Return of Income resulted in a refund of Rs. 33,00,130/- after taking into

SHRI JAYANTILAL P. SATIKUNVAR,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-2(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, ground number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is being set aside to the file of assessing officer with the aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

TDS of Security Service Charges of Rs.2,17,743/- is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 3). The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Rajkot has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in respect of Charging the interest u/s.234 A/B/C/D is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 4). The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT vs. ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (SWISS SINGAPORE INDIA PVT. LTD., GANDHIDHAM

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

penalty on custom duty of Rs. 7,53,200/- 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition made on account of commission expenses paid to foreign agents of Rs. 2,21,28,335/- 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, GANDHIHDAM, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

penalty on custom duty of Rs. 7,53,200/- 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition made on account of commission expenses paid to foreign agents of Rs. 2,21,28,335/- 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. DCIT-ACIT CENT-2 RKT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

penalty on custom duty of Rs. 7,53,200/- 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition made on account of commission expenses paid to foreign agents of Rs. 2,21,28,335/- 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 , RAJKOT vs. ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING(INDIA) PVT.LTD. (SWISS SINGAPORE INDIA PVT. LTD.), GANDHIDHAM

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

penalty on custom duty of Rs. 7,53,200/- 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition made on account of commission expenses paid to foreign agents of Rs. 2,21,28,335/- 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

VIMALBHAI MOHANBHAI NARIYA PROP. S.M. CORPORATION,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, , JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, for statistical purpose/

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 359/Rjt/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing)

TDS – 3, 4606, GIDC, Phase – III, Dared, JamnDagar Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AEKPN4149M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri V. P. Sutaria, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24/02/2025 : 19/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining

SHRI NIRMAL RAJENDRA JAGETIYA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO (TDS-3), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty orders passed by\nthe Assessing Officer, under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961\n[hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'], both dated 17.03.2017.\n2.\nSince common and identical issues are involved, therefore, these two\nappeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is\nbeing passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts

INCOME TAX OFFICER,TDS-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR vs. SAMPATLAL BADRILAL SOMANI, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.298/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Tds – 3, Vs. Sampatlal Badrilal Somani 2Nd Floor, Taranjali Proprietor Of S. B. Metal Udyog, Buildign, P. N. Marg, Plot No. 4/A/1, Nr. Kriti Weight Jamnagar – 361008 Bridge, Shanker Tekri, Udyognagar, Jamnagar – 361004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahhps0245D (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS), Ahmedabad who is a prescribed authority. The late filling of form 27C looses its sanctity and judicial stand. (iii)This clearly again concludes that assessee, though understands and believes that the goods traded during the relevant year are very well within the definition of SCRAP, tries to escape from the liability of TCS on sale of such scrap