ITO, WARD-2(3)(8),, SURAT vs. SHRI SUNIL KUMAR P. JAIN,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1164/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 M/S. Supreme Auto, Principal Commissioner Bilimora Road, National Of Income-Tax- Valsad Highway No.8, Samroli, At Chikhli, Navsari 396 521 Pan: Aamfs 3499 K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

40A(2)(b) of the Act. Hence, the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. On the issue of Rs. 5 Lakh loan given to Abdul Razak Memon, Supreme Auto vs. Pr. CIT- Valsad /I.T.A.No.1164/Ahd/2017/A.Y. 12-13 Page 4 of 19 the assessee A.R. indirectly admitted no justification of said loan. There defect

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

TDS at the interest payment. The addition has been made under section 40a(ia) for non-deduction of TDS accepting

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

40a(ia) of the Act, is rejected. The provisions of section 201(1) of the Act stipulates that where a person who is required to deduct TDS

ACIT,CIRCLE-2,, BHARUCH vs. SHRI MOHMEDSADIK A SHAIKH, ANKALESHWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.682/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Mohmedsadik A. Shaikh, Bharuch. Prop. Of Earth Power, Behind Mona Complex, Rajpipla Chowkdi, Ankleshwar-395002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahzps5638N (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee) Assessee By : Ms Kinjal V. Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A)-Vadodara-3/10033/2017-18, Dated 30.07.2018, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

40A(2)(b) will not apply to cases, where the assessee’s books of account have been rejected u/s 145(3) of the Act and without appreciating that factual aspects of the case did not warrant invoking the ITA.682/SRT/2019/AY.2014-15 Mohmedsadik A. Shaikh provision of section 144 of the Act. The A.O. on the basis of information and material available

SACH ELECTRO MECH PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

section 40A(ia)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) and disallowance out of interest paid on TDS

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act. All the purchases are supported by valid and genuine bills. During the course of business, the assessee had purchased rough and polished diamonds from the local market by way of cash. The cash book was furnished. The confirmation of parties were also furnished. The contents in the show cause notice that transactions are bogus

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

Section 40A(3) of the Act. All the purchases are supported by valid and genuine bills. During the course of business, the assessee had purchased rough and polished diamonds from the local market by way of cash. The cash book was furnished. The confirmation of parties were also furnished. The contents in the show cause notice that transactions are bogus

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT vs. AKANSHA SHIP BREAKING PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.112/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Akansha Ship Breaking Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Dhamanwal Complex, Opp. Surat. Rajkumar Theater, Udhna, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca2307F (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Vijayvargia, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sita Ram Meena, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Surat-1/10577/2016-17 Dated 14.02.2020, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”], Dated 28.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.39,52,119/- Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act On Account Of Non-Deduction Of Tds, According To The Provisions Of Section 194H Of The Act, On Bank Guarantee Commission Charged By The Bank On Behalf Of Assessee For The Line Of Credit Facility Extended By It, Holding That The Payment Made To The Bank In The Nature Of Commission For Extending The Line Of Credit Facility Is Not In The Nature Of Commission & Therefore The Provisions Of Section 194H Are Not Applicable To Such Payments, Without Appreciating That In The Assessee'S Case The Bank Charge Has The Character Of Commission?

40a(ia) of Bank Guarantee Commission paid to ICICI Bank for the reason that payments made prior to 01.01.2013 is liable for TDS, however, Coordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi deleted the addition observing as follows: "We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. Regarding the disallowance of Rs.4019608

AMIYA SACHINDRA DEY,,SILVASSA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA WARD,, VAPI

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

section 40a(ia) of the Act is not applicable if the payee files return of income and the payee pays tax and the and the payee files return of income on which TDS

M/S. D.KHUSHALBHAI JEWELLERS,,SURAT vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.822/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S. D. Khushalbhai Jewellers, Vs. The Acit, Circle-3, 1, Khandwala Estate, Parle Point, Surat. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabfd7547G (Assessee) (Respondent)

TDS. 12. At the outset itself, the Learned Counsel submits before us that the assessee may be granted the benefit of second proviso to Section 40a

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT vs. MRS. KIRAN CHOWDHURY, PROP. M/S. KIRAN TRADE LINK,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Meena

TDS has been deducted and these persons have filed return of income showing the income from the assessee. Just because, these persons could not attend before the AO as they are residing at Raipur and were unable to attend before the AO due to pregnancy of their daughter. The 25% of payments were treated as non-genuine. Considering the facts

MRS. KIRAN CHOWDHURY,,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Meena

TDS has been deducted and these persons have filed return of income showing the income from the assessee. Just because, these persons could not attend before the AO as they are residing at Raipur and were unable to attend before the AO due to pregnancy of their daughter. The 25% of payments were treated as non-genuine. Considering the facts

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH vs. M/S. J.K. JEWELLERS, BHARUCH

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the Revenue, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.440/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) The Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Bharuch. Station Road, Near Rungta School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.443/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, Station Road, Near Rungta Bharuch. School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent)

section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. (iii) If the telescopic benefit is given to the assessee then, first, corresponding purchase for unaccounted sale of Rs.2,55,46,125/- ITA Nos.440 & 443//SRT/2018/AY.2014-15 M/s. J. K. Jewellers should have been accounted for. The ld Counsel for the assessee could not throw any light on this aspect. (iv) In view

M/S. J.K. JEWELLERS,BHARUCH vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the Revenue, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.440/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) The Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Bharuch. Station Road, Near Rungta School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.443/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, Station Road, Near Rungta Bharuch. School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent)

section 40A(3) of the I.T. Act. (iii) If the telescopic benefit is given to the assessee then, first, corresponding purchase for unaccounted sale of Rs.2,55,46,125/- ITA Nos.440 & 443//SRT/2018/AY.2014-15 M/s. J. K. Jewellers should have been accounted for. The ld Counsel for the assessee could not throw any light on this aspect. (iv) In view

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

TDS while making payment, which resulted into positive financial growth of the company. In view of this factual position, the recipient Directors paid tax on such commission, then it is an Act of charging tax under right head in the right hands of the right person for the right Assessment year. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that

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

TDS while making payment, which resulted into positive financial growth of the company. In view of this factual position, the recipient Directors paid tax on such commission, then it is an Act of charging tax under right head in the right hands of the right person for the right Assessment year. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURAT vs. HAYWOOD HOSPITALITY(INDIA) PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kambledeputy Commissioner Of Haywood Hospitality(India) Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Surat 1St Floor, Gujarat Jhm Hotels Ltd., Near Bharti Park, Athwalines, Surat. [Pan : Aabcj9651 N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit(Dr) Respondent By: Shri Hiren R Vepari, Ar Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026 O R D E R

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,13,33,549/ made on account of disallowance of salary expenses

VITRAG PRINTS,SURAT vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.338/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Vitrag Prints, Vs. The Acit (Osd), K-2619 To 2622, Millenium Ward -1(2)(5), Textile Market Ring Road, Surat. Surat - 395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfv5612L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Jaykishan Goel, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By 22/09/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 14/12/2023

40A(2)(b) reported in Audit Report and ITR and Large other expenses claimed in the Profit & Loss account. Thereafter notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 10.08.2016 and duly served upon the assessee firm on 27/08/2016. Subsequently a notice u/s 142(1) cum- questionnaire was issued on 02.06.2017 and this was too duly served upon the assessee’s firm