ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

ARHAM ENTERPRISE,RAJKOT vs. ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeal appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinhashri Diesh Mohan Sinha

TDS), Shop No.3, 8 – B, Sarvoday Society, B, Sarvoday Society, Ward – 1, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Nr. Hargange Weigh Bridge, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Aayakar bhavan, Amruta Estate, Veraval (Shaper) - 360025 M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AATFA1101C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

6A) of the Act, without applying proviso to that section. Hon'ble\nCIT(A) has not considered ground raised by assessee.\"\n4. The relevant material facts, as culled out from the material on record, are\nas follows. In the assessee's case, the assessment was completed, under\nsection 143(3) of the Act, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee

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)

6A) of the Income Tax Act particularly when the assessee has failed to furnish the statutory declaration as per section 206C(1A) within the stipulated time prescribed under section 206C(1B)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 37C of the Income Tax Act Rules, 1962. 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

M/S. G. K. TRADRES ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

TDS-I, Rajkot holding that the appellant-assessee was in default u/s 206C(1) read with sub-sections (6) and (6A

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Specified Authorities As Per Prescribed Manner In The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Upheld The Order Of The Assessing Officer.

TDS)-3, Room No. Shri Nirmal Rajendra 208, 2nd Floor, Tarangali Jagetiya, Prop: of Manish Building, P.N. Marg, Vs Metal Corporation, Shed Jamnagar No. 435A, GIDC, STU, (Appellant) Jamnagar (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.R Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 01-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 14-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- This