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

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

SANTOSH SINGH HUKAM SINGH KARNAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad with regards to the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on addition made of 5% of total purchase value to the tune of Rs. 43,83,431/- from

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. 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

ABHYUTHTHAN GRAM VIKAS MANDAL,SURAT vs. CIT EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue, both are dismissed

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for Assessment Year 2018–19. Since both appeals arise out of the same order, they are heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order. ITO Vs. Abhyuththan Gram Vikaas Mandal Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2– 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-SURAT, SURAT vs. ABHYUTHTHAN GRAM VIKAS MANDAL, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue, both are dismissed

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for Assessment Year 2018–19. Since both appeals arise out of the same order, they are heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order. ITO Vs. Abhyuththan Gram Vikaas Mandal Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2– 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI vs. JASHMIN KANTILAL PATEL, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.125/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Vs. Jashmin Kantilal Patel, Vapi Circle, Plot No.320/9, 40 Shed Area, Gidc, Vapi Vapi – 396191. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agcp0492M (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 09/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

section 143(1) of the Act, to the tune of Rs.2,13,98,205/- (The said income / addition of Rs.2,13,98,205/- relates to total TDS of Rs.1,60,305/-). 5. On appeal by assessee, the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition observing as follows: “Facts of the case and appellant's submission were perused. Taxability of income comes

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

1. The ld. Faceless CIT(A) has erred and was not justified on the facts of the case and in law in confirming the addition ex parte despite the assessee requesting for adjournment on the date of hearing. 2. Prayer 2.1 The ld. Faceless CIT(A) may be kindly directed to hear the appeal and decide accordingly. 2.2 Personal hearing

HASUMATIBEN JAGDISHBHAI PATEL, ,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.322/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Hasumatiben Jagdishbhai Principal Commissioner Of Patel Income-Tax, Valsad, 301, Vs 80 Shree Ram Estate, Opp. 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Pandesara Petrol Pump Office, Palak Arcade, Shanti Bhedwad, Surat-394220 Nagar, Tithal Road, Pan : Aaopp 1698 K Valsad-396001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

TDS or that such issues were not verified. The Ld. PCIT gave his observation / findings without giving any opportunity of such additional issue. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that without giving any opportunity on the issue which was not subject-matter of show cause, the order passed by Ld.PCIT under section 263 to that extent is absolutely illegal

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

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

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

RAHUL COAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,SURAT vs. ITO TDS-2, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1220/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) Rahul Coal India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Addl. Cit (Tds), 429-432 Golden Point, Ring Road, Surat, Nr. Bsnl Office, Surat-395 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcr1044D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 15.10.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi /Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. which in turn arises out of the penalty order passed by Addl. CIT(TDS), Surat u/s 271CA the Act, dated 25.02.2022. 2. Grounds