KERMAN MINOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2013-14) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultra vires and the same

KERMAN MONOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2013-14) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultra vires and the same

KERMAN MONOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2013-14) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultra vires and the same

KERMAN MINOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2013-14) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultra vires and the same

KERMAN MINOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2013-14) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultra vires and the same

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2015-16) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultravires and the same

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2015-16) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultravires and the same

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2015-16) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultravires and the same

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

26-Q for A.Y. 2015-16) is treated as “lead” case. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in levying the late fee of u/s 234E of the act which is ultravires and the same

ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL CO. PVT LTD,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.541/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Engineering Professional Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit -1, 444, Royal Arcade, Opp. Sarthana Zoo, Surat Varachha Road, Near Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat – 395006, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabce0313Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/02/2025

section 263 of the Act and referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts in the cases of Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 243 ITR 83 (SC), CIT vs. Pavilee Projects Pvt. Ltd., 149 taxman.com 115 (SC), CIT vs. Nagesh Neatwears Pvt. Ltd., 345 ITR 135 (Delhi), ITO vs. D. G. Housing Projcts Ltd., (ITA No.179/2011

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.-3, SURAT vs. SH. HARESHBHAI MOHANBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No.01/Srt/2021 (Ay 2010-11) It(Ss)A No.09/Srt/2020 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Dineshchandra D Income-Tax, Central Circle- Koradia, 3Room No.507, 5Th Floor, 9/10, Dayanand Society, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura B/H.Navyug College, Gate, Surat-395001 Rander Road, Surat Pan No: Acupk 3696 A Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee

TDS made on such interest and the amount received and repaid during the year. Such details are recorded by ld CITA) at page No. 18 & 19 of his order. The assessee also stated that the assessing officer considered only peak of all transaction and made addition of Rs. 4.15 Crore in AY 2010-11 and Rs. 2.14 Crore

VAPI GREEN ENVIRO LIMITED,VAPI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , VALSAD

In the result, various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Vapi Green Enviro Limited, Pr.C.I.T., Valsad. 135, 1St Floor, Via House, G.I.D.C. 301, 3Rd Floor, Palak Vs. Char Rasta, Vapi, Gujarat, Arcade, Shanti Nagar, India-396195. Tithal Road, Pan: Aaacv 8289 P Valsad-396001. Appellant Respondednt

10 Vapi Green Enviro Ltd. Vs Pr.CIT Assessing Officer/CPC made adjustment by disallowing the benefit of principle of mutuality. The assessee filed appeal before CIT(A) against adjustment made by CPC. The ld CIT(A) allowed full relief to the assessee. Again, the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) on 03/03/2021

SACH ELECTRO MECH PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

10. The ld AR for the assessee explained that there was difference of Rs.48,794/ in the TDS account of Rahul Raj Estate Pvt. Limited, which was explained and the assessing officer was satisfy with the explanation of assessee and has not made any addition on account of suppressed receipt with reference to TDS in Form- No AS 26. Though

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

section 292C of the Act and by observing that the paper\nwas not in the handwriting of assessee and not signed by the assessee and\ndespite the fact that addition has been made on the basis of incriminating\ndetails/document recovered during the search proceedings as a whatsapp\nimaged found from the mobile of the assessee and the assessee has failed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

section 292C of the Act and by observing that the paper\nwas not in the handwriting of assessee and not signed by the assessee and\ndespite the fact that addition has been made on the basis of incriminating\ndetails/document recovered during the search proceedings as a whatsapp\nimaged found from the mobile of the assessee and the assessee has failed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

section 292C of the Act and by observing that the paper\nwas not in the handwriting of assessee and not signed by the assessee and\ndespite the fact that addition has been made on the basis of incriminating\ndetails/document recovered during the search proceedings as a whatsapp\nimaged found from the mobile of the assessee and the assessee has failed

SHRI BALAJI J BHAGNURE,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2022 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Shri Balaji J. Bhagnure Income Tax Officer, 98, Santkrupa Society, In Ward-2(3)(1) Aayakar Vs Lane Of Mahadev Mandir, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Godadara Devadh Road, Surat-395001 Godadara, Surat-394210 Pan No: Alkpb 8794 M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 27.12.2022 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 27.12.2022 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [For Short To As “Nfac/ Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 26.07.2022 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 11.11.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Reopening Assessment By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The I.T. Act 1961. Sh. Balaji J Bhagnure 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well Law On The Subject, The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Passing Ex-Parte Order U/S 144 Of The I.T. Act.

10% under section 194C. The receipt is nominal and the income of assessee was below taxable limit. Thus, the issuance of notice under section 148 was not valid. 4. For non-compliance of notice of Assessing Officer, the assessee explained that assessee (he) is a small person and is not well versed with income tax matters. Therefore, he could

THE ITO, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, SURAT vs. MICRO INKS LIMITED,, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2375/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, V Micro Inks Limited, (International Taxation), Surat. S. Bilakhia House, Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2707/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Micro Inks Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, Bilakhia House, Muktanand S. (International Taxation), Marg, Chala, Vapi – 396 191. Surat. [Pan: Aaach 7063 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Gopala Krishnan – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 उ"घोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 14.02.2020

TDS on the said payment, because of benefit of exception Clause provided in Sec-(1)(v)(b) of the Act. However, the ld.Assessing Officer had not considered manufacturing activities through wholly owned subsidiaries as a business carried on outside India. The company had raised debts in foreign currencies. Under scheme quoted by Reserve Bank of India known as external commercial