ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT vs. VALENCIA CORPORATION, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) A.C.I.T. M/S Valencia Corporation, Central Circle-4, S. No. 400, T.P. No. 29 (Vesu-Rundh Vs. Surat. Magdalla), F.P. No. 45/2, Nr. Siddhivinayak Temple, Vesu, Surat (Gujarat) Pan : Aakfv 2329 K Appellant Respondednt C.O. No. 17/Srt/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 257/Srt/2022)(Ay: 2016-17) M/S Valencia Corporation, A.C.I.T. S. No. 400, T.P. No. 29 (Vesu- Central Circle-4, Vs. Rundh Magdalla), F.P. No. 45/2, Surat. Nr. Siddhivinayak Temple, Vesu, Surat (Gujarat) Pan : Aakfv 2329 K Appellant/Objector Respondednt

section 250(5). 4. In addition and alternative to cross objection No. 1, 2, & 3, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly appreciated the facts that entire amount of Rs. 2,56,70,912/- pertains to works contractor(i.e. Konark Infratech) and TDS

AKSHAR INFRA,BHARUCH vs. ITO(TDS), BHARUCN, BHARUCH

In the result, the ground Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.276/Srt/2023 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Physical Court) Akshar Infra Income Tax Officer (Tds), Bharuch, Hari Kunj, R.S.No.347, Old N.H.S. Vs Station Road, Bharuch- Nr. Samrajya School, 356069 Andada, Ankleshwar, Bharuch-393001 Pan No. Abbfa 5016 E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

section 201(1)/201(1A) on 28.07.2021 and also held liable to pay interest from the date on which Tax at Sources (TDS) was liable to be deducted. The Assessing Officer worked out @ 1% on total sale consideration at 4 Akshar Infra Rs.1,47,000/- and also calculated interest from 13.05.2015 to till July, 2021 i.e., for seventy-five months

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , TDS, CPC, SURAT

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in\nshort, 'the Act') by the learned Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) - 9, Delhi [in short, ‘the CIT(A)’] for the different assessment years\n(AYs) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. All these appeals\nbefore the CIT(A) were against orders passed

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC, SURAT

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in\nshort, 'the Act') by the learned Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) - 9, Delhi [in short, ‘the CIT(A)’] for the different assessment years\n(AYs) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. All these appeals\nbefore the CIT(A) were against orders passed

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

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. ITO, 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

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 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act’) dated 14.05.2024 by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-4 Kolkata [in short, the ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2015-16, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 201(1) r.w.s

VINAYLAL SHANKARLAL PRAJAPATI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(4), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Vinaylal Shankarlal Prajapati, I.T.O., Block No. 26, Plot No. 1, Shyam Raw Ward-2(3)(4), Vs. House, Godadara Road, Parvat Gam, Surat. Surat. Pan No. Abcpp 1291 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer issued notice dated 31/03/2023 for making submission on or before 24/03/203. The assessee requested adjournment up to 8th April,2023. However, the ld. CIT(A) passed the order on 30/03/2023 by taking a view that despite granting three opportunities, the assessee

THE UDHNA CITIZEN CO OPP. BANK LIMITED ,NOW MERGE WITH KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO.OP. BANK LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. I.T.O TDS -2 , SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 201(1) r.w.s 201(1A) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the TDS AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 4. Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The assessee

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

250/- invoking section 69A & 69C of the Act as\ndiscussed in para 6.3 of the appellate order.\n2. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.14,05,430/-\nbeing profits on “on-money” at 13% thereof u/s 69A of the Act as discussed in\npara 7.5 of the appellate order.\n3. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred

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

250/- invoking section 69A & 69C of the Act as\ndiscussed in para 6.3 of the appellate order.\n2. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.14,05,430/-\nbeing profits on “on-money” at 13% thereof u/s 69A of the Act as discussed in\npara 7.5 of the appellate order.\n3. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred

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

250/- invoking section 69A & 69C of the Act as\ndiscussed in para 6.3 of the appellate order.\n2. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.14,05,430/-\nbeing profits on “on-money” at 13% thereof u/s 69A of the Act as discussed in\npara 7.5 of the appellate order.\n3. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred

SIDDHA CONSTRUCTION,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI (UT) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE , VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Heard arguments of both parties and perused the record. In this case, the addition of Rs.34,50,000/- on account of unsecured loan received from the assessee. In the present case, the assessment under section 143(3) has been conducted

ARVINDBHAI RAMNIKLAL RAVAL HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(6), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.19/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Arvindbhai Ramniklal Raval Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ (Huf)308, Chhapania Street, 1(3)(6), Surat, Room No.303, 3Rd Vs. Adajan, Surat-395 009 Floor, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat-395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaeha 1847 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 04.12.2023 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi /Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 24.12.2019. Grounds

DHARMESH DAMJIBHAI PATOLIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.487/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Dharmesh Damjibhai Patoliya Vs. Ito, 101 Gandamaya Apartment Ward – 2(2)(1), Matrukrupa Society, Kamrej Surat Charrasta Opp. Azim Hospital, Tal: Kamrej, Surat-395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahzpp1276F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P.M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/07/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 30.10.2023 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well

S K KABRA & COMPANY,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(2)(1), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.502/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) S. K. Kabra & Company, The Ito, Vs. 101, “Kauttilya” Plot No.327, Ward-1(2)(1), Opp. Noble Paper, Khatodara, Surat Surat – 395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfs6674D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (In Short ‘The Nfac’), Delhi, Dated 17.05.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Central Processing Centre (In Short ‘Cpc’), Bengaluru, U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), Dated 11.07.2018. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017- 18, Is Barred By Limitation By Six (6) Days. Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Learned Counsel For The Assessee Submitted A Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Requesting The Bench To Condone The Delay. The Contents Of The Said Petition Are Reproduced Below:

TDS mismatch is to be submitted before the Assessing Officer, therefore matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on this issue. 7. On the other hand, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of Assessing

HLE ENGINEERS PVT LTD,SURAT vs. THE ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [here-in-after referred to as Ld. CIT(Appeals

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARDOLI

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), both dated 06.02.2025 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. ITA No.329/SRT/2025 pertains to the quantum appeal whereas ITA No. 330/SRT/2025 is in respect of the consequential penalty order