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 /

section 201(1) and 201(1A) dated 26.03.2013. 4. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A) the action of AO was confirmed. The ld. CIT(A) while confirming the action of AO noted that hearing of appeal was fixed on 03.06.2014, on which the adjournment was sought on behalf of assessee and hearing was fixed on 12.08.2014. In the meantime

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

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)

35,062/-, therefore, as per the Act, the amount of Rs.39,50,000/- was required to be treated as deemed dividend in the hand of recipient. 5. The AO held that TDS of Rs.3,95,000/- (10% of Rs.39,50,000/-) was required to be deducted u/s.194 of the Act by the deductor assessee on aforementioned deemed dividend of Rs.39

SHRI LABHUBHAI RAVJIBHAI JASANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7) , SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Labhubhai Ravjibhai Jasani, I.T.O., 17-18, Astvinayak Row House, Ward-1(3)(7), Vs. Nr. Parshuram Garden, Adajan, Surat. Surat-395009. Pan No. Abnpj 1872 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

35,34,657/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The Assessing Officer made disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS

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

TDS liability. The intimation under section 143(1) was sent to the assessee on 15/06/2018. 4. Aggrieved by the demand raised in the intimation/assessment order dated 15/06/2018, the assessee filed before the ld. Girishchandra K Bhatt Vs Circle 1(3) CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee was transferred /migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in terms

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

TDS liability. The intimation under section 143(1) was sent to the assessee on 15/06/2018. 4. Aggrieved by the demand raised in the intimation/assessment order dated 15/06/2018, the assessee filed before the ld. Girishchandra K Bhatt Vs Circle 1(3) CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee was transferred /migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in terms

NIMESH KANUBHAI TOPIWALA - HUF,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Nimesh Kanubhai Topiwala-Huf, D.C.I.T., B-801, Shri Sarjan Palace, Nr. Nandini Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 3, Vip Road, Vesu, Surat, Surat. Gujarat-395007. Pan No. Aahhn 1784 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

TDS). The assessee filed application under section 154 for rectification of such mistakes. The application of assessee was rejected vide order dated 20/11/2019. The said rejection order was not communicated to the assessee by way of SMS alert. The assessee has not seen their e-mail, thus the Karta of assessee was not aware about dismissal/rejection of application under Section

SHANKAR ZETHABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shankar Zethabhai Patel, Vs. The Pcit(Central), 505, Sraynik Park Appartment, Rander Surat. Road, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Cfepp7235M Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) 15/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

TDS out of Rs. 70 lacs. The amount actually paid is evident from the bank statement as explained herein above. 3. Your honour has raised another issue that assessee has shown the turnover of Rs.31,35,000/- for the purpose of section

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

35,022/-. Out of which, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs.5,28,86,206/- under section 40(a)(ia), as the A.O. has made addition of entire labour expenses in the assessment order, so he has not made separately disallowed the amount under section 40(a)(ia). The Assessing Officer disallowed the payment to labour contractor exceeding Rs.50

ITO, WARD-3(3)(3), SURAT vs. M/S. M D HOUSE BUILD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

35,886 Carting 4 Madhubhai K 32,64,724 32,64,724 Material with Vaghasiya labour 5 Nilesh R Dobariya 26,37,360 26,37,360 Material with labour 6 Pravinkumar M 31,52,101 31,52,002 Material with Korat labour 7 Ukeshbhai D Korat 31,52,002 31,52,002 Material with labour 8 Vijaykumar

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 reimbursement of expenses payment in respect of IT Data line charge Rs.1,35,98,703/- to MHM Holding under the head "reimbursement of expenses" to the ultimate beneficiary is BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany during the financial year ending on 31-03-2012. Total tax after grossing up u/s 195A on remittance of Rs. 1,35

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

TDS on reimbursement of expenses payment in respect of IT Data line charge Rs.1,35,98,703/- to MHM Holding under the head "reimbursement of expenses" to the ultimate beneficiary is BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany during the financial year ending on 31-03-2012. Total tax after grossing up u/s 195A on remittance of Rs. 1,35

M/S KASHIRAM ATMARAM,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.236/Srt/2022 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Physical Court) Kashiram Atmaram Deputy Commissioner Of 3/1949, Siddhi Sheri, Income-Tax, Vs Salabatpura, Surat-395003 Central Circle-(1)(1)(1), Pan No. Aadfk 2670 H Room No.108, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ( ‘the Act’) on 22.12.2017. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1.The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the ld. A.O of making M/s Kashiram Atmaram addition to the tune of Rs.35,00,000/- on the ground

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

section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee filed an affidavit and submitted that appeal could not be filed within 60 days because the order of CIT(A) was passed ex-parte and uploaded on the online portal, but the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices and the order of the CIT(A). In Form 35, he has mentioned

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

35. The appellant is a limited company and it has been filing TDS quarterly statements regularly for different financial years. The appellant has also filed its return of income regularly. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the contention of ld. AR that the appellant was not aware of the orders passed u/s 200A

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALTRET HOUSE, SAIYEDPURA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

35. The appellant is a limited company and it has been filing TDS quarterly statements regularly for different financial years. The appellant has also filed its return of income regularly. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the contention of ld. AR that the appellant was not aware of the orders passed u/s 200A

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

35. The appellant is a limited company and it has been filing TDS quarterly statements regularly for different financial years. The appellant has also filed its return of income regularly. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the contention of ld. AR that the appellant was not aware of the orders passed u/s 200A

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

35.\nThe appellant is a limited company and it has been filing TDS quarterly\nstatements regularly for different financial years. The appellant has also filed\nits return of income regularly. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the\ncontention of Id. AR that the appellant was not aware of the orders passed\nu/s 200A