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(1) for non- deduction of tax and created a demand of Rs.83,442/- in the following manner:- Sr. Payee of interest Amount of TDS to be TDS Demand u/s No. interest paid deducted @ 1% deducted 201(1) 1 Ashish Varma 200094 20009 0 20009 2 Kunjgali Trust 250929 25093 0 25093 3 Revaben Ramanbhai

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(1) for non- deduction of tax and created a demand of Rs.83,442/- in the following manner:- Sr. Payee of interest Amount of TDS to be TDS Demand u/s No. interest paid deducted @ 1% deducted 201(1) 1 Ashish Varma 200094 20009 0 20009 2 Kunjgali Trust 250929 25093 0 25093 3 Revaben Ramanbhai

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(1) for non- deduction of tax and created a demand of Rs.83,442/- in the following manner:- Sr. Payee of interest Amount of TDS to be TDS Demand u/s No. interest paid deducted @ 1% deducted 201(1) 1 Ashish Varma 200094 20009 0 20009 2 Kunjgali Trust 250929 25093 0 25093 3 Revaben Ramanbhai

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(1) for non- deduction of tax and created a demand of Rs.83,442/- in the following manner:- Sr. Payee of interest Amount of TDS to be TDS Demand u/s No. interest paid deducted @ 1% deducted 201(1) 1 Ashish Varma 200094 20009 0 20009 2 Kunjgali Trust 250929 25093 0 25093 3 Revaben Ramanbhai

ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL CO. PVT LTD,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.541/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Engineering Professional Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit -1, 444, Royal Arcade, Opp. Sarthana Zoo, Surat Varachha Road, Near Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat – 395006, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabce0313Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/02/2025

section 194C of the Act, if a single payment does not exceed Rs.30,000/- or the total sum paid during the financial year does not exceed Rs.1 lakh, deduction of TDS u/s 190C is not required. However, it is not clear from the submission of the appellant that the daily wages and labour charges of Rs.8

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

54 are based at Ranchi and remaining two are group concerns of the assessee. The AO had issued DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat Vs. Kejriwal Industries Ltd.,/ITA No.1509/AHD/2016 for A.Y. 2011-12 Page 4 of 49 commissions to DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi and ACIT-TDS, Circle- Ranchi under section

D V PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) D. V. Properties Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit - 1, 748-749, Golden Plaza Market, Surat. Ring Road, Surat – 395002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8392B (Appellant) (Respondent) Ms Chaitali Shah, Ca Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 19/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2023

section 37(1) of the Act. 7. In view of the above facts, the ld PCIT observed that in the computation of STCG, the amount of Rs.3,85,407/- debited on account of addition made during the year under consideration, without any documentary evidence, PF and ESI contribution of Rs.43,433/- received from employees but deposited after the due date

SANJAY MAHADEV KHOPKAR,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-3(2), , SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Sanjay Mahadev Khopkar, A.C.I.T., C-102, Sanskar Jyot, Gaon Devi Circle-3(2), Vs. Road, More Tower Dombivilli West Surat. Kalyan, Thakurli Thane, Maharastra-421201. Pan No. Agipk 1744 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(1) dated 31/5/2018 and created demand of Rs. 215,330/- for want of TDS not deposited by the employer in the account of Central Government. The appeal of assessee was also dismissed by the ld. NFAC vide its order dated 29/03/2022 by taking a view that only amount in Form 26AS is Rs. 54

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

54,198 Carting/material purchase 11 K & D Carting 3,18,377/- 3,18,377 Carting/material purchase 12 Jignesh K Korat 36,11,543 36,11,543 Material with labour 13 Jai Shihori Krupa 7,85,701 7,85,701 Carting/material Carting purchase Total 2,74,57,986 2,74,57,986 3. The Assessing Officer further recorded that assessee

M/S. RUCHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(1), , SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

54,995/-. Thereafter, the case of assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). Notice under Section 148 dated 21/3/2017 was served upon the assessee to file return of income within 30 days. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income on 31/5/2017

M/S. RUCHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(1), , SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

54,995/-. Thereafter, the case of assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). Notice under Section 148 dated 21/3/2017 was served upon the assessee to file return of income within 30 days. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income on 31/5/2017

M/S. RUCHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(1), , SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

54,995/-. Thereafter, the case of assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). Notice under Section 148 dated 21/3/2017 was served upon the assessee to file return of income within 30 days. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income on 31/5/2017

M/S. RUCHI SAREES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(1), , SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

54,995/-. Thereafter, the case of assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). Notice under Section 148 dated 21/3/2017 was served upon the assessee to file return of income within 30 days. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income on 31/5/2017

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

TDS on foreign remittance made as well as the case law of Guj High Court in the case of Dahyabhai Veljibhai Patel in TA No.793 of 2013 would not apply in this case as the issue has not reached its finality ? 7. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground(s) of appeal either before

ACIT, CC - 2., SURAT vs. M/S. MANGALMURTY DEVELOPERS, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.217/Srt/2020 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Vs. M/S. Mangalmurti Developers, Surat. 17/18, Astvinayak Raw House, Near Parshuram Garden, Adajan, Surat-395001. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavfm9510C

54,550/- was paid to Gujarat Gas Ltd., which is state Govt. public under taking. Remaining amount of Rs.79,27,716/- was paid to 11 persons through account payee cheques. The TDS was deducted and deposited in Govt. account and complete addresses, PAN of these persons were submitted before the Assessing Officer. The ld CIT(A) observed that during

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

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

54 taxmann.com 343 (Del) held that in absence of material to show net profit rate, presumptive net profit rate of 8% as stipulated in section 44AD could be taken for estimation of income. Hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, I direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to the extent of 8% and re-compute

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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S MBC INFRA SPACE PRIVATE LIMITED, VAPI

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Mbc Infra Space Pvt. Tax, Ltd. Vs Vapi Circle, Vapi. 202, Second Floor, Centre Point, N.H. No. 8, Mahavir Nagar, Vapi. Pan: Aahcm8684N Respondent/ Assessee Appellant/ Revenue

section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.03.2016. The Revenue raised following grounds of appeal:- “i) Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. (A) erred in allowing the ground of appeal of the assessee on account of difference in payment received as per 26AS and as per books without considering the fact that

MANSI RINKESHKUMAR RATHOD,SURAT vs. ITO, TDS, WARD-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.699/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) Mansi Rinkeshkumar Rathod, Vs. Tds, Cpc, Ayakar Bhawan, 4-A/2, Yogi Krupa Society, New Sector – 3, Up – 201010. Civil Road, Surat - 395007 Jurisdiction: Tds, Ward – 1, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ciapr0584A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/05/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 25.04.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well