BATAVA DEVLI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,BATAVA DEVLI, TAL. KUNLAVA, DIST. AMRELI. vs. THE ADIT, (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed in section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act, especially in the fact that the scope of sub- clause (ii) has been specifically defined in section 143(1). As observed earlier, in our view, the scope of sub- clause (ii) of section 143(1)(a) does not cover delay in filing of return of income beyond the due prescribed

M/S CHANDRAKANT H. KAKKAD,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, this ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

1), but it includes all the sub section of Section 139 of the Act. ….. ….we find that if the intention is not to retain cash but to invest in construction or purchase any property and if such investment period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not attracted. It appears from the records that the assessee has complied with

SHREE SANALIYA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,LITAL MOTALILIYA SANALIYA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

4. Shree Sanaliya Seva AALAS5721J 2019-20 31.08.2019 30.11.2020 Sahakari Mandali Ltd. As seen from the above details, the returns in all the four cases were filed beyond the due date of their filing as per the date specified in section 139(1). The Ld. A.O. CPC Bengaluru processed the return of income u/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) disallowing

DHARESHWAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ,VILLAGE: - DHARESHWAR, TALUKA: - RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

4. Shree Sanaliya Seva AALAS5721J 2019-20 31.08.2019 30.11.2020 Sahakari Mandali Ltd. As seen from the above details, the returns in all the four cases were filed beyond the due date of their filing as per the date specified in section 139(1). The Ld. A.O. CPC Bengaluru processed the return of income u/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) disallowing

AMRUTPUR SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,VILLAGE: - AMRUTPUR TALUKA DHARI, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

4. Shree Sanaliya Seva AALAS5721J 2019-20 31.08.2019 30.11.2020 Sahakari Mandali Ltd. As seen from the above details, the returns in all the four cases were filed beyond the due date of their filing as per the date specified in section 139(1). The Ld. A.O. CPC Bengaluru processed the return of income u/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) disallowing

AMBARADI SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,AMBARADI , DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC), BANGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

4. Shree Sanaliya Seva AALAS5721J 2019-20 31.08.2019 30.11.2020 Sahakari Mandali Ltd. As seen from the above details, the returns in all the four cases were filed beyond the due date of their filing as per the date specified in section 139(1). The Ld. A.O. CPC Bengaluru processed the return of income u/s. 143(1)(a)(ii) disallowing

ISS SHIPPING INDIA PVT. LTD., (AS AGENT FOR MAERSK TANKERS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD., SINGAPORE),NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, RAJKOT

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

1. The ld. counsel has also referred decision of LRL Management K/S (as foreign Commercial Manager/Agent of Maersk Tankers Singapore Pvt. Ltd. ) vs. ITO (International Taxation) in ITA No. 756/Rjt/2014 and ITA 276/Rjt/2015 (Rajkot ITAT) page 8 of para 11 of this judgment on the issue that there was no dispute with regard to application to section 144C

ISS SHIPPING INDIA PVT. LTD., (AS AGENT FOR MAERSK TANKERS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD., SINGAPORE),NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, RAJKOT

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

1. The ld. counsel has also referred decision of LRL Management K/S (as foreign Commercial Manager/Agent of Maersk Tankers Singapore Pvt. Ltd. ) vs. ITO (International Taxation) in ITA No. 756/Rjt/2014 and ITA 276/Rjt/2015 (Rajkot ITAT) page 8 of para 11 of this judgment on the issue that there was no dispute with regard to application to section 144C

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: GKA Km2 to 248 NH-8 NHAI Road: 9.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: GKA Km2 to 248 NH-8 NHAI Road: 9.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: Bhavnagar Irrigation: 12.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: Bhavnagar Irrigation: 12.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: Morbi Maliya Rural P-2 Road I.T.A Nos. 126 & 147/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 45 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. Backbone Enterprise Ltd. 8.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. Contract No. 1: Morbi Maliya Rural P-2 Road I.T.A Nos. 126 & 147/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 45 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. Backbone Enterprise Ltd. 8.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

ITO WARD 3(1)(4), RAJKOT-STATION- AMRELI, AMRELI, GUJARAT vs. AVADH AGRI EXPORTS, AMRELI, GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

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

section 195(1) of the Act, the AO noted that the assessee has made foreign commission payment to non-resident agent Page 2 of 20 ITA No.816/Rjt/2025 -AY 2012-13 ITO vs. Avadh Agri Exports and ocean freight, however, the TDS was not made deducted while making the payment/crediting in its accounts which is required to be disallowed. The assessing

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-3(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. SONPAL EXPORTS PVT. LTD., RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 29/Rjt/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Dcit, Circle – 3(1), Vs. M/S. Sonpal Exports Pvt. Ltd. Rajkot Aayakar Bhavan, Room Dhari Bagsara Road, Nr. Ice No. 114, 1St Floor, Race Course Factory, Amreli Ring Road, Rajkot Pan No.: Aajcs0177N (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am; By Way Of This Appeal, The Revenue, Has Challenged Correctness Of The Order Dated 16.11.2017, Passed By The Learned Cit(A), In The Matter Of Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Grievances Raised By The Revenue, Which Are Interconnected & Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 13,96,33,023/- Holding That Provision Of Section 195 Will Not Be Applicable. 2. On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Erred In Ignoring The Facts That The Assessee Has Failed To Prove The Genuineness Of Foreign Commission Expenses Before The A.O. 3. It Is, Therefore, Prayed That The Order Of The C.I.T. (A) May Be Set Aside & That Of The A.O. Be Restored To The Above Extent. Dcit Vs. M/S. Sonpal Export Pvt. Ltd.

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the returned income of Rs. 1,64,75,250/- without any modifications. Later on, the assessee`s case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, was issued to the assessee, on 07-08- 2013, which was duly served upon

CHAKARGADH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,CHAKARGADH SEVA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC),, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

1)(a)(ii), which specifies the list for disallowance under the said provision and prima facie adjustment for late filing of return of income is not specifically included therein.It was held that that since return of income was filed within due date permissible under section 139(4

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. I.T.A Nos. 128 & 149/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No 40 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. Backbone Enterprise Ltd. Contract No. 1: Bhachau Ramvav Rapar Adesar 9.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80-IA (4) of the Act in respect of the above projects. I.T.A Nos. 128 & 149/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No 40 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT vs. Backbone Enterprise Ltd. Contract No. 1: Bhachau Ramvav Rapar Adesar 9.1 In this case, Ld. CIT(Appeals) while disallowing