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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Pan: Aampl 3903 F (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2 Rajkot, 2Nd Floor, Amruta Estate, M.G. Rad, Rajkot-360 001 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/03/2025 : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

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

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Pan: Aampl 3903 F (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/- on disallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid to Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said amount 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

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.76 To 80/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13 & आयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No. 81/Rjt/2022 निर्धारणवर्ष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya 3Rd Floor, Parth, Diwanpara | बनाम Main Road, Rajkot-3600 001 Vs. Pan: Aampl 3903 F Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2 Rajkot, 2Nd Floor, Amruta Estate, M.G. Rad, Rajkot-360 001 (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 Order Per Bench, Captioned Six Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ays) 2008-09 To 2012-13 & Ay 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (“Ld.Cit(A)” For Short) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders, Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) & 271Aab(1)(C) Of The Act.

penalty on Rs.1,01,970/- on disallowance made of Rs.3,00,000/-u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, being commission paid to Rajesh Bhatt on the alleged ground that assessee had wrongly claimed the said amount 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

SHRI ANILKUMAR AMARNATH AGARWAL,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt.Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumaramarnathagarwal Vs. Ito, Ward-1 27/2, Panchvatisociety Jamnagar. Nr.Gaushala Jamnagar 361 008. Gujarat. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022

TDS on the same. Accordingly, this interest income was added to his income and penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act initiated

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

M/S MARUTINANDAN CONSTRUCTION,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

RAJESHBHAI CHIMANBHAI JAVIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.312/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009

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

VIPULKUMAR HEMANTLAL POPAT, UPLETA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.321/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010

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

SHRI CHAMUNDA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,TDS-2,, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.32/Rjt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Income Tax Officer, Shri Chamunda Credit Cooperative Tds-2, Vs. Society Limited, Rajkot. Famous Shopping Centre, 150 Feet Ring Road, Near Parijat Party Plot, Chandra Park Main Road, Rajkot-360005. Pan: Aabas9343J

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

SHAILESH AMRUTLAL KOTECHA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty in respect of three additions are as under:- (i) Addition on account of unexplained investment of Rs. 1,56,736/- (ii) Addition on account of TDS

SHAILESH AMRUTLAL KOTECHA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty in respect of three additions are as under:- (i) Addition on account of unexplained investment of Rs. 1,56,736/- (ii) Addition on account of TDS

M/S. EAGLE CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1 (2), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Eagle Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, “Ëagle House” Circle-1(2), Rajkot. Near Moti Tanki Chowk, Rajkot – 360 001. [Pan – Aaace 8903 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2022 O R D E R Per Suchitra Kamble:

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on addition on account of interest income of Rs.3,32,587/- is unwarranted, unjustified and bad ion law.” 3. The assessment was completed on 26.03.2015 thereby making the addition in respect of donation, TDS

M/S J.K. TRANSPORT & CONSTR. CO.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Briefly, the facts of the case are that during the course of assessment, the AO observed that as per TDS

SHRI DEEPAK INDRAKUMAR BHAGCHANDANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasad

TDS amount of Rs.6,239/- was deducted. This income was not found reflected in the ITR filed by the assessee with the department. Hence I also made an addition of Rs.55,050/- to the total income of the assessee as income not offered for taxation. Penalty

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