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

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

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.365/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S J. K. Paper Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mills, Surat. Fort Songadh – 394660. Dist. Tapi, Gujarat. [Pan: Aaact 6305 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 41(1) of the IT Act ? 3- Whether on the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing officer on account excess Process Stock declared to the Bank without appreciating the facts that the Assessing officer rightly made addition on after finding difference in stock

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

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

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 /

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

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

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S. SHAH VIRCHAND GOVANJI JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal raised by revenue is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

section 36(1)(ii) would not apply, however, it is allowable u/s.37(1) of the Act. 33. In the present case also the AO has failed to establish that the commission paid to the recipient Directors was payable as profits or dividends of the assessee company. Per contra, from the facts and circumstances revealed from the orders of the authorities

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S. SHAH VIRCHAND GOVANJI JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal raised by revenue is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

section 36(1)(ii) would not apply, however, it is allowable u/s.37(1) of the Act. 33. In the present case also the AO has failed to establish that the commission paid to the recipient Directors was payable as profits or dividends of the assessee company. Per contra, from the facts and circumstances revealed from the orders of the authorities

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

1,75,20,834 33. The assessing officer while passing the assessment order allowed deduction under section 80IA in respect of Land Fill I, Land Fill II and Incinerator project by treating the said undertakings as a composite undertaking. The ld CIT(A), held that the Incinerator is a new infrastructure facility and hence eligible for deduction under section

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

1,75,20,834 33. The assessing officer while passing the assessment order allowed deduction under section 80IA in respect of Land Fill I, Land Fill II and Incinerator project by treating the said undertakings as a composite undertaking. The ld CIT(A), held that the Incinerator is a new infrastructure facility and hence eligible for deduction under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) D.C.I.T. M/S J.K. Paper Ltd. Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mill, Vs. Surat. Fort Songadh, Surat. Pan : Aaact 6305 N Appellant Respondednt

1)(c) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submissions on each of the additions/disallowances, on which the penalty was levied by the Assessing officer. On the disallowance of deduction under Section 80IA of the Act, it was contended by the assessee that the deduction

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) (1),, SURAT vs. ANUSHREE SAREES PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue ( In ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1680 To 1682/Ahd/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.61/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. M/S. Anushree Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Surat. D-5409, Raghukul Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat-395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagca5772J (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee)

35,860 Approx. was taken on account of expenses to arrange LTCG if any. So total disclosure for the AY 11-12 Rs 2.20 Crores, for AY 12-13 Rs 90.00 Lacs and Rs.40.00 for the AY 13-14. 8.3 The above declaration in IDS 2016 scheme has been accepted by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 Surat

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) (1),, SURAT vs. ANUSHREE SAREES PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue ( In ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1680 To 1682/Ahd/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.61/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. M/S. Anushree Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Surat. D-5409, Raghukul Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat-395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagca5772J (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee)

35,860 Approx. was taken on account of expenses to arrange LTCG if any. So total disclosure for the AY 11-12 Rs 2.20 Crores, for AY 12-13 Rs 90.00 Lacs and Rs.40.00 for the AY 13-14. 8.3 The above declaration in IDS 2016 scheme has been accepted by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 Surat

DY. C.I.T.CIR., 1(1)(1), SURAT vs. M/S ANUSHREE SAREES PVT.LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue ( In ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1680 To 1682/Ahd/2017 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.61/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 To 2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. M/S. Anushree Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Surat. D-5409, Raghukul Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat-395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagca5772J (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee)

35,860 Approx. was taken on account of expenses to arrange LTCG if any. So total disclosure for the AY 11-12 Rs 2.20 Crores, for AY 12-13 Rs 90.00 Lacs and Rs.40.00 for the AY 13-14. 8.3 The above declaration in IDS 2016 scheme has been accepted by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 Surat

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

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

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

1,74,510 White reti 3 M/s M.D. House Build Kotadiya 3 Laljibhai Kotadiya 4,35,886 4,35,886 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