BANK OF INDIA, ,SURAT vs. DY. CIT, TDS, CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

section 201(3) has to be calculated from the last revised statement, we find that on similar ITA.No 246-248 & 323/SRT/2019 A.Ys.09-10 to 11-12 Bank of India, Surat submission, the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sodexo SVC India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) while considering the similar objection of Revenue held that such correction

BANK OF INDIA, ,SURAT vs. DY. CIT, TDS, CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

section 201(3) has to be calculated from the last revised statement, we find that on similar ITA.No 246-248 & 323/SRT/2019 A.Ys.09-10 to 11-12 Bank of India, Surat submission, the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sodexo SVC India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) while considering the similar objection of Revenue held that such correction

BANK OF INDIA, ,SURAT vs. DY. CIT, TDS, CIRCLE, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

section 201(3) has to be calculated from the last revised statement, we find that on similar ITA.No 246-248 & 323/SRT/2019 A.Ys.09-10 to 11-12 Bank of India, Surat submission, the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sodexo SVC India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) while considering the similar objection of Revenue held that such correction

BANK OF INDIA,SURAT vs. ITO (TDS-1), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

section 201(3) has to be calculated from the last revised statement, we find that on similar ITA.No 246-248 & 323/SRT/2019 A.Ys.09-10 to 11-12 Bank of India, Surat submission, the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sodexo SVC India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) while considering the similar objection of Revenue held that such correction

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

TDS, Circle- Ranchi under section 131 (1)(d) of the Act to conduct enquiries in case of the lenders based at Ranchi. The said officers have sent the enquiry reports, which are framing part of assessment order. The findings of the AO as per chart is as under: S. Name of the Alleged Findings of enquiry N. Lenders Loan(includi

SHRI GUFRAN AHMED CHAUDHARI,,VALSAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI WARD-1,, VAPI

In the result, appeals of the Assessees (in ITA No

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.618/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prakash F Singh, The Income Tax Officer, V Ward-7, Room No.810, 8Th Floor, Rbl, 63/751, Chanod Colony, Gidc, S. Vapi-396195 Fortune Square-Ii, Vapi Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Asnps 4835N (Assessee) (Respondent)

TDS 47,025/- ITA Nos.618 & 623/SRT/2018 A.Y. 2011-13 Prakash F Singh &Gurfan A Chaudhury The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on above additions / disallowances for concealment of income and issued notices u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act on 13.02.2017. 5. During the penalty proceedings, the assessing officer held that

SHRI PRAKASH F.SINGH,,VAPI vs. THE ITO, WARD-7,, VAPI

In the result, appeals of the Assessees (in ITA No

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.618/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prakash F Singh, The Income Tax Officer, V Ward-7, Room No.810, 8Th Floor, Rbl, 63/751, Chanod Colony, Gidc, S. Vapi-396195 Fortune Square-Ii, Vapi Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Asnps 4835N (Assessee) (Respondent)

TDS 47,025/- ITA Nos.618 & 623/SRT/2018 A.Y. 2011-13 Prakash F Singh &Gurfan A Chaudhury The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on above additions / disallowances for concealment of income and issued notices u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act on 13.02.2017. 5. During the penalty proceedings, the assessing officer held that

HASMUKHBHAI RAVJIBHAI CHAUDHARI,MANDVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, BARDOLI

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.325/Srt/2022 (Ay 2011-12) (Hearing In Physical Court) Hasmukhbhai Ravjibhai Income Tax Officer, Chaudhari, Choramba, At Ward-2, Bardoli-394601 Vs Post Choramba Taluka Mandvi, Surat-394440 Pan No: Amipc 8927 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

27,000/- in his bank account with the State Bank of India Branch and also received an amount of Rs.1,00,800/- on account of contract receipts on which Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under section

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

27 DBS Bank Ltd., Singapore US $ Hostmann- US $ 4,000,000 4,000,000 Steinberg Inc., USA Standard Chartered Bank, UK US $ Hostmann- US $ 5,000,000 5,000,000 Steinberg Inc., 2.3 The appellant company had not deducted TDS on the aforesaid payments on the basis of the benefit of exception clause provided in Section

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

27 DBS Bank Ltd., Singapore US $ Hostmann- US $ 4,000,000 4,000,000 Steinberg Inc., USA Standard Chartered Bank, UK US $ Hostmann- US $ 5,000,000 5,000,000 Steinberg Inc., 2.3 The appellant company had not deducted TDS on the aforesaid payments on the basis of the benefit of exception clause provided in Section

SHRI JAYESH KANTILAL MODI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

27,574/- and TDS deducted on interest income was Rs. 2813/-. On verification of P&L account, it was found that the assessee has shown interest income of Rs. 15,110/- and claimed TDS of Rs. 2813/- in his return of ITA 357 & 356/SRT/2017 Sh. Jayesh Kantilal Modi Vs ITO income, therefore, the difference of Rs. 12,464/- was added

SHRI JAYESH KANTILAL MODI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

27,574/- and TDS deducted on interest income was Rs. 2813/-. On verification of P&L account, it was found that the assessee has shown interest income of Rs. 15,110/- and claimed TDS of Rs. 2813/- in his return of ITA 357 & 356/SRT/2017 Sh. Jayesh Kantilal Modi Vs ITO income, therefore, the difference of Rs. 12,464/- was added

RAVINDRANTH J. MISHRA,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -7, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

27(1)(c) of the Act. The assessee has filed appeal before Tribunal on 20.09.2022. Thus from the date of knowledge of dismissal of appeal of assessee by NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) after 42 days. Considering the fact that assessee has filed his affidavit and stated on oath 4 Ravindranath J. Mishra that he was not served with the impugned order

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, BHARUCH

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

27,828.89 Book value of total liability of the NCPL as on 1.4.2005 21,668.62 Net value of the assets as per books of account 6,160.27 Amount of consideration given 7,849.26 Excess of amount of consideration over the value of 1,688.89 the assets of NCPL i.e. Goodwill 5. The assessee further contended that the working /calculation

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, BHARUCH

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

27,828.89 Book value of total liability of the NCPL as on 1.4.2005 21,668.62 Net value of the assets as per books of account 6,160.27 Amount of consideration given 7,849.26 Excess of amount of consideration over the value of 1,688.89 the assets of NCPL i.e. Goodwill 5. The assessee further contended that the working /calculation

ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), SURAT vs. M/S. SATYAM ENTERPRISE, SURAT

In the result, this part of issue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) I.T.O., M/S Satyam Enterprise, Ward- 3(3)(4), 182-Thakordwar Society, Nr. Vs. Surat. Spinning Mill, Varachha Road, Surat. Pan No. Abvfs 5076 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2014 which has been held as retrospective. To support such submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Rajkot Tribunal in Punabhai G. Pardava Vs ITO ITA No. 219/Rjt/2018 dated 08/06/2022. With regard to sub-contractor No. 6, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that

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

27,34,500/- 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 ITO, WARD-1,, NA vs. ARIVS.SHRI ANILKUMAR AMRUTLAL CHAHWALA, NAVSARI

In the result, this ground of appeal is rejected

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2078/Ahd/2010 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1003/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Amrutlal Chahwala, Ward-(1), Navsari. 102, Trimurti Complex, Vijalpore, Navsari. [Pan: Abnpc 6308 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

section 40(a)(ia). The Assessing Officer disallowed the payment to labour contractor exceeding Rs.50,000/- without remitting TDS. The assessing officer identified 187 labour contractors in Padmavati Gems 258 labour contractor in Parth Corporation, thereby disallowed Rs.1.68 crore in Padmavati Gems and Rs.3.60 crore in Parth Corporation. Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee made detailed written submission