THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S DML EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

M/S. D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared to be an assessee in default u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. The addition made at Rs.67,84,807/- on account of disallowance of payments

AHLSTROM FIBERCOMPOSITES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,MUNDRA (KUTCH) vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 437/Rjt/2018 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Year:2014-2015 Ahlstrom Munksjo Vs. D.C.I.T, Fibercomposites(India) Pvt. Ltd., Gandhidham Circle, Mundra Sez Integrated Textile & Gandhidham. Apparel Park (Mitap), Plot No.07, Survey No.141, Mundra, Kutch-370421. Pan: Aagca9137M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, A.R Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, C.I.T Dr सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2023 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 20/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:

90,225/- and Business Area Service Fees of Rs. 69,88,754/- to its AE namely Alhstrom Corporation, Finland. The assessee also paid Business Area Service Fees of Rs. 3,17,80,966/- to another AE namely Alhstrom Non-Woven LLC, USA. The AO also found that the same issue was there in A.Y. 2011-12 to 2013-14 wherein

BAN LABS PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.202/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Ban Labs Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Ban House, Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Income Tax-1, Nagar, Gondal Road (South), Rajkot Rajkot-360004 (Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacb8999C (Appellant) (Respondent)

90,74,553/- i.e. the average investment). The ld. PCIT also noticed that assessee has not maintained separate accounts to earn exempt and non-exempt income. In the absence of separate accounts by way of which the management and administrative expenditure could be segregated, there is no dispute and there cannot be any doubt that some expenditure is incurred

M/S PHOENIX PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE PR. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roy)

TDS was deducted. Accordingly, we are of the view that there was no verification carried out by the AO during the assessment proceedings with respect to the amount of gross receipt shown by the assessee viz a viz the gross receipt reported in the form 26AS. It is the settled law that the order of the AO can be held

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

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

1-3-2022, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply In view of the above, since the delay of 298 days in filing appeal is falling within the Covid pandemic period, the delay is hereby being condoned. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the survey under section 133A of the Act was carried

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

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

1-3-2022, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply In view of the above, since the delay of 298 days in filing appeal is falling within the Covid pandemic period, the delay is hereby being condoned. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the survey under section 133A of the Act was carried

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ACIT, CIR.-2(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 166/Rjt/2019 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner 202, Arpan Complex, Kalawad Vs Of Income-Tax, Road, Opp. Swami Narayan Circle-2(1), Temple, Rajkot-360001 Rajkot Pan : Aabcc 8197 Q अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Ms. Madhumita Roy:-

1)(va) of the Act on the late payment of PF. Subsequently, a revision order dated 22.03.2018 was passed by the learned PCIT invoking provisions of Section 263 of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to verify the nature of payment made by the assessee- company to M/s. Parsoli Motors Pvt. Ltd. of Rs.2,90,000/-, as on the payment

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.

TDS an amount paid to deductee and, in turn, deductee also hasn’t offered to tax income embedded in such amount The penalty for tax withholding lapse per se is separately provided under section 271C and, therefore, section 40(a)(i) isn’t attracted to the same. Hence, an assessee could not be penalized under section 40(a)(ia) when

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

90,166/-. The assessee has also been treated, as assessee in default, under section 201 of the Act and therefore assessing officer held that assessee is liable to pay interest under section 201(1A) the Act, at Rs.8,71,558/-.The Ld. Counsel argued that if the assessee has less than 10 Trucks, then the provisions of Section 194C

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

90,166/-. The assessee has also been treated, as assessee in default, under section 201 of the Act and therefore assessing officer held that assessee is liable to pay interest under section 201(1A) the Act, at Rs.8,71,558/-.The Ld. Counsel argued that if the assessee has less than 10 Trucks, then the provisions of Section 194C

GOPALLAL RAMPRASAD KABRA,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is being restored to the file of ITO (TDS) with the above directions

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal. Total Tax Effect 28,72,848/-

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: I.T.A No. 243/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 2 Gopallal Ramprasad Kabra vs. ITO Sr. No. Grounds of Appeal Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal (see note below) 1 The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder

FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALLIED INDS.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE GANDHIDHAM,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 29.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows (ITA No. 99/Rjt/2023- A.Y. 2015-16) : “1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,63,690/- being the depreciation claimed

FRIENDS SALT WORKS AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES,GANDHIDHAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 29.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows (ITA No. 99/Rjt/2023- A.Y. 2015-16) : “1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,63,690/- being the depreciation claimed

DEPUTY COMMIOSSIONER OF INCOMETAX, JAMNAGAR vs. VASANTBHAI MULJIBHAI KANANI, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed, whereas appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.124/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2022-23 Dy. Cit, Cir-1 Vasantbhai Muljibhai Kanani बनाम Jamnagar. Plot No.7, Ambica Enterprise Vs. Sardar Patel Ind. Estte-4 Indira Road Opp: Jakat Naka, Jamnagar-361004 (Guj) Pan : Aitpk 8038 P आयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.08/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2022-23 Vasantbhai Muljibhai Kanani Dy. Cit, Cir-1 बनाम Plot No.7, Ambica Enterprise Jamnagar. Sardar Patel Ind. Estte-4 Vs. Indira Road Opp: Jakat Naka, Jamnagar- 361004 (Guj) Pan : Aitpk 8038 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent)

1. The order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income (Appeals), NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act date 26.12.2024 allowing partial-relief of Rs. 5,18,82,394/- against the order passed by the Ld. assessing officer making total addition of Rs. 5,34,64,594/- is defective to the extent of remaining relief

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S TIRTH AGRO TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,, GONDAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Roy

section 131(1) have confirmed that they provided services of job work, received charges based on competitive ITA No. 414/Rjt/15 [DCIT vs. M/s. Tirth Agro Technology Pvt. Ltd.] A.Y. 2012-13 - 12 - market rate and offered the same for the taxation. The learned CIT (A) further given the finding that the there was no evidence brought by the Revenue suggesting

DHIMANT RASIKLAL SHAH,JAMNAGAR vs. PR. CIT-1, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.354/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) Shri Dhimant Rashiklal Shah Vs. The Pr.Cit-1, Home Maker, Opp. Sahvam Patrol Aayakar Bhavan, Taranjali Building, Pump, Saru Section Road, Jamnagar-361008 Jamnagar-361008 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afups2094H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Smt. Pallavi, Ld. Cit(Dr) : 04/08/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

Section Road, Jamnagar-361008 Jamnagar-361008 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFUPS2094H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR Respondent by : Smt. Pallavi, Ld. CIT(DR) : 04/08/2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : 03/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed

M/S. RADHE EXIM PVT. LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.75/Rjt/2021 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Year: 2016-2017 M/S. Radhe Exim Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Commissioner Plot No.G-557, Vs. Of Income-Tax-1, Gidc Metoda, Rajkot. Kalawad Road, Metoda, Rajkot-360021. Pan: Aadcr1763P

90,333/- only. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny to verify the receipt of unsecured loan from the person not filing the return of income. As such, the assessee during the year under consideration has shown receipt of unsecured loan for ₹ 25 lacs and ₹ 1.45 crores from the parties namely M/s Hi-can Industries