KIRTIKUMAR NAGINDAS SHAH,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(6), SURAT

In the result, ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.535/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Kiritkumar Nagindas Shah, Vs. The Ito, A-1103, Regent Residency, Near Ward – 2(3)(6), Saurabh Society, Pal, Surat Surat – 395009, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anjps9031P (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS. Therefore, it was presumed by the assessing officer that the assessee has not deducted tax or deducted tax but not deposited tax into Central Government Account. Hence, the assessing officer observed that the claim of interest expenses of Rs.17,30,151/- was not allowable as deduction u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act. Therefore, the assessing officer made

RAJ KISHORE PRASAD,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.146/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Hearing) Raj Kishore Prasad, Vs. The Ito, 201, 2Nd Floor, Devashish Complex, Ward-3, Nr. Regenta Central Antarim Hotel, Valsad Off Cg Road, Ahmedabad "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aitpp0535A (Assessee) (Respondent)

TDS Valsad on 13th Jan, 2015 treating the assessee in default for non- deduction of tax from the payment made for LTC/LFC on visiting abroad. During the course of penalty proceedings the joint CIT has stated that assessee has failed to furnish any satisfactory reason/explanation for not deducting tax, therefore, he has levied penalty of Rs.1,70,220/- u/s. 271C

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

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE DY.CIT.,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

TDS and treat this payment as revenue expenditure in their books of account. Moreover, assessee is claiming all the expenses incurred during the year pertaining to the burning of sludge or keeping it in godown, but the income is deferred to future period, which is not tenable and against the provisions of law and as held by Hon'ble Apex

THE ACIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH vs. BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,, ANKLESHWAR

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

TDS and treat this payment as revenue expenditure in their books of account. Moreover, assessee is claiming all the expenses incurred during the year pertaining to the burning of sludge or keeping it in godown, but the income is deferred to future period, which is not tenable and against the provisions of law and as held by Hon'ble Apex

N R CORPORATION,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.526/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 (Physical Hearing) N. R. Corporation, Vs. The Pcit - 1, B-202, Capital Status, Opp – Hariom Surat Nagar, Near Atman Park, L. P. Savani Road, Adajan, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamfn9368A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025

10% and 2% on the impugned expenses. He has also filed section-wise detailed report from Form 26Q from Q1 (April – June) to Q4 (January – March) where dates of payment, challan numbers and dates are given. It is seen therefore that al details were filed before the ld. PCIT and assessee has shown that TDS was deducted and deposited

SACH ELECTRO MECH PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Court - Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.262/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, C/2, Maheshwari Apartment, S Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Timaliyawad, Nanpura, . Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aaics 8963 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Manish J.Shah – Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

TDS. In the result, the ground No. 3 is allowed. 14. Ground No.4 relates to disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that during the financial year relevant to the assessment period under consideration, the assessee has not shown any exempt income, therefore there should not be any disallowance under section

GIRISHCHNDRA K. BHATT,SURAT vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, CIR.3(1) NEW CIR.1(3), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

section 143(1) of the Act dated 15/06/2018 was issued AO/CPC, and created demand for the want of TDS return by employed. We find that the assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) on 28.06.2018. The appeal of the assessee was transferred to NFAC in term of notification of CBDT dated Girishchandra K Bhatt Vs Circle

GIRISHCHANDRA KESHAV BHATT,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

section 143(1) of the Act dated 15/06/2018 was issued AO/CPC, and created demand for the want of TDS return by employed. We find that the assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) on 28.06.2018. The appeal of the assessee was transferred to NFAC in term of notification of CBDT dated Girishchandra K Bhatt Vs Circle

INTERNATIONAL CREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 2(22)(e) of the Act treats certain loans and advances given by a company to a concern in which a substantial shareholder has interest as deemed dividend, provided the payment is not in the ordinary course of business. The key elements required for applicability are: (i) that the payer company must be a closely held company; (ii) that

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

34 of 49 Ranchi and ACIT (TDS)-Ranchi. The outcome of joint examination with the ACIT Circle 1(1) (2) Surat has been duly discussed by the Ld. CIT (A) in para No. 7 to 10 of his appellate order. These findings as given by the Ld. CIT (A) are duly reproduced in para No. 9 above in this order

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

SHILPRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE JCIT, T.D.S. RANGE,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr.Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.3160/Ahd/2014 & 2054/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shilpraj Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. 1) The Ito/Tds-2, 12, Suryakiran Apt., Ghod-Dod Surat. Road, Surat – 395007. Jcit/T.D.S. [Pan: Aadcs 3045 H] Range/Surat. अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Ashwin Parekh – Ca राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 03.03.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Memeber: 1. These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4 & 3, Surat For Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. In Ita No.316/Ahd/2014, The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of Order Under Section 201(1) R.W.S 201(1A) Passed By Ito- Tds. & In Ita No.2054/Ahd/2016, The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271C Of The Act. As Both The Appeals Are Arising Of The Order Passed By Ito-Tds Under Section 201(1)/201(1A) & Are Inter- Connected With Each Other, Therefore, With The Consent Of The Shilpraj Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito/Tds-2/Srt /

34,20,965/- to Director is covered u/s. 2(22)(e) and thereby u/s. 194 of the Act without appreciating the facts of actual payment of Rs. 20,51,515/- during the year, accumulated profit of different years, payments made in earlier years, Nature of payment made to Bank against loan taken by company. The T.D.S. and interest

SHILPRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS- 2,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr.Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.3160/Ahd/2014 & 2054/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shilpraj Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. 1) The Ito/Tds-2, 12, Suryakiran Apt., Ghod-Dod Surat. Road, Surat – 395007. Jcit/T.D.S. [Pan: Aadcs 3045 H] Range/Surat. अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Ashwin Parekh – Ca राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 03.03.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Memeber: 1. These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4 & 3, Surat For Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. In Ita No.316/Ahd/2014, The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of Order Under Section 201(1) R.W.S 201(1A) Passed By Ito- Tds. & In Ita No.2054/Ahd/2016, The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271C Of The Act. As Both The Appeals Are Arising Of The Order Passed By Ito-Tds Under Section 201(1)/201(1A) & Are Inter- Connected With Each Other, Therefore, With The Consent Of The Shilpraj Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito/Tds-2/Srt /

34,20,965/- to Director is covered u/s. 2(22)(e) and thereby u/s. 194 of the Act without appreciating the facts of actual payment of Rs. 20,51,515/- during the year, accumulated profit of different years, payments made in earlier years, Nature of payment made to Bank against loan taken by company. The T.D.S. and interest

ACIT, CC-3, SURAT vs. SHRI NARESH NEMCHAND SHAH, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.197/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Acit, Central Cir.-3, Vs. Naresh Nemchand Shah, Surat. Abhishek House, Bh. Jeevan Bharti School, Kadampali Society, Nanpura, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acrps 0182 J (Assessee)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee)

10(38) in respect of capital gain arising from sale of shares - Assessing Officer took a view that share transactions were bogus because company 'C' whose shares were allegedly purchased, was a penny stock - He thus rejected assessee's claim - Tribunal upheld order passed by Assessing Officer - High court also took a view that finding arrived by Tribunal was based

SARLABEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

34,500/- under section 50C. The ld AR of the assessee submits that during the year under consideration the assessee has sold immovable properties/agricultural land situated at R.S. No.316 Block No.313 Khata No.76 ad measuring 14270 square meter in Moje Abrama, Taluka Kamraj, Surat along with her husband/co-owners on 17.10.2013. The assessee was having ½ share in the property. The assessee

MICRO INKS PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS MICRO INKS LTD.),VAPI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ( INTL. TAXN.), SURAT

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

section 9(l)(v) r.w.s 195 of the Act and also as per Article 12 of the DTAA entered into with Germany. As per record available, the assessee-company in its reply dated 13/02/2014 6. claimed that agreement to the provide the service between BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany and MHM Holding GmbH, Germany and not with Micro Inks

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

section 9(l)(v) r.w.s 195 of the Act and also as per Article 12 of the DTAA entered into with Germany. As per record available, the assessee-company in its reply dated 13/02/2014 6. claimed that agreement to the provide the service between BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany and MHM Holding GmbH, Germany and not with Micro Inks

M/S. K.N. DIAMOND,,BILIMORA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVSARI CIRCLE,, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1788/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S K.N.Diamond, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Soniwad, Bilimora, Of Income Tax, Navsari Navsari – 396 321. Circle, Navsari. [Pan: Aadfk 3167 H] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Parimalsinh Parmar – Advocate राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr

10 M/.s.K.N.Diamond Vs. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari./ ITA No.1788/AHD/2016 for A.Y.2012-13 15. Ground No.5 relates to disallowance of addition of Rs.2,00,000/- in respect of job-work expenses. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessing officer made lump sum disallowance of Rs.2,00,000/- out of total job-work expenses Rs.33