STATE BANK OF INDIA,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-3, NAVSARI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.37 & 38/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtualcourt Hearing) State Bank Of India Income Tax Officer (Tds-3) Room No.607, Aaykar Regional Business Office-V, Navsari- Vs. Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- Tapi, 1St Floor, Shourya Apartment, 395001 Opp. Lunsikul Ground, Navsari- 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacs 8577 K (Appellant ) (Respondent)

TDS-3 has treated the Bank as an assessee in default for purpose of section 201 of the Act and raised the following demand for A.Y.2013-14 and 2014-15 Asst.Year LTC paid to Tax deductible Interest @1% p.m Total (Rs.) employees

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

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)

TDS in Form- No AS 26. Though, the assessing officer made additions on other various issues. 11. On the issue of service tax and VAT, the ld AR for the assessee submits that the assessee is following inclusive method of accounting in respect of accounting of taxes and government levies, which is in accordance with the mandates of section 145A

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

TDS is made on the 24 ITA No.431-432/SRT/2018 & CO 12/SRT/2021 (A.Ys 07-08 & 12-13) M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. discount of Rs. 4.697 crore made to dealers. The assessing officer held that dealers are acting as agent of the assessee and like commission agent. The so-called dealers have rendered services in the course of buying

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

TDS is made on the 24 ITA No.431-432/SRT/2018 & CO 12/SRT/2021 (A.Ys 07-08 & 12-13) M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. discount of Rs. 4.697 crore made to dealers. The assessing officer held that dealers are acting as agent of the assessee and like commission agent. The so-called dealers have rendered services in the course of buying

I.T.O.WARD -2(1)(4), SURAT vs. VENUS UPCOUNTRY TRADING PVT. LTD., SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 388/Srt/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(1)(4), Vs. Venus Upcountry Trading Pvt. Ltd., Surat. 6-1181, Dalia Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395003. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccv7694N

sections reference that is why TDS has not been deducted, Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA) references, proof in respect of absence of permanent establishment of the recipient parties, their payment evidence in foreign currency and relevant forms which enable assessee to make such payment etc. and hence, in the absence of ITA 388/SRT/2017/AY.2012-13 Venus Upcountry Trading Pvt. Ltd. all such

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

92,920/-. Subsequently, scrutiny assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (here in after 'the Act') on 28.12.2019, by the Assessing Officer accepting the returned income. 3. Later on, Learned Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (in short “Ld PCIT”) has exercised his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. On perusal

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

section 9(l)(v) r.w.s 195 of the Act and also as per Article 12 of the DTAA entered into with Germany. As per record available, the assessee-company in its reply dated 13/02/2014 6. claimed that agreement to the provide the service between BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany and MHM Holding GmbH, Germany and not with Micro Inks

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

section 9(l)(v) r.w.s 195 of the Act and also as per Article 12 of the DTAA entered into with Germany. As per record available, the assessee-company in its reply dated 13/02/2014 6. claimed that agreement to the provide the service between BT (Germany) GmbH & Co., Germany and MHM Holding GmbH, Germany and not with Micro Inks

DHANSUKHBHAI PARAGJIBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1021/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Shri Dhansukhbhai Deputy Commissioner Of Paragjibhai Patel, Income-Tax, 143, Brahaman Faliya, Circle - 2(3) Surat Dindoli Udhna 394210 Pan: Avdpp7007 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

92,000 on account of long-term capital gain treating sale of agricultural land. 4. At the out set , the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that issue is covered by decision of Surat bench of ITAT by decision in the case of Shri Satish M. Patel and 22 others group cases v. DCIT Circle 2(3) Surat, in which

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.,-3, SURAT vs. SHRI PANNALAL MAHENDRA KOTHARI, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Pannalal Mahendra Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Kothari, 8A, Abhishek Vs Room No.507, 5Thfloor, Apartment, S.D. Road, Ayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat Surat-395001 Pan : Aizpk 3155 F Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

92,650/-. In the computation of his total income shown income from ‘other sources’ and ‘brokerage’. The case was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer during the assessment noted that the search action under section 132 of the Act was carried out on04.09.2015 in the case of ‘Param Properties’ of Surat. During the course of such search action, several incriminating

SWASTIK CORPORATION,VAPI vs. PR. CIT 3, VALSAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.21/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S Swastik Corporation The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Room No.301, 3Rd Floor, Palak A-305, Surya Co-Operative Vs. Housing Society Ltd., Plot Arcade, Pali Hill Shanti Nagar, Tithal No.61, Vapi-396195 Road,Valsad-396001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abtfs 1028 G अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""थ" / Respondent

92,940/-, after making an addition of Rs.1,19,500/-, on account of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3. Later on, Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (in brief, Ld. PCIT), has exercised his jurisdiction, under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was observed by ld PCIT that re-assessment order framed

MANISH UMED DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.245/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Virtual Court Hearing) Manish Umed Doshi, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 403, Dalamal House, Jamnalal Bajaj Ahmedabad. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabpd3578R

92,000/- is of earlier year that means the assessee has not received any rent from M/s ICICI Bank Limited. However, the assessee nowhere claimed that M/s ICICI Bank Limited is not his tenant in the A.Y. 2017-18 and he has not received any rent income from them for the A.Y. 2017-18. Also the assessee has not furnished

LATE MAHESH RAMANLAL MODI L/H MANISH MAHESH MODI,BHARUCH vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

In the result, ground No. VII of appeal raised by the assessee is also allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Physical Hearing) Late Mahesh Ramanlal Modi, A.C.I.T., Through L-H Manish Mahesh Modi, Circle-1, Vs. Near Shakuntal Apartment, Dahej Bharuch. Bypass Road At Nandelav, Bharuch-392001 (Gujarat) Pan No. Adfpm 4030 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

TDS of transporter. The Assessing Officer also recorded that due to time constraint in the show cause notice, it was difficult to obtain PAN and address of the creditors. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee 7 Late Mahesh Ramanlal Modi through L/H-Manish Mahesh Modi Vs ACIT has no clarity about the facts of the case on the issue raised

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

section 132 (4A) / 292C of the Act.\nii) Dumb papers – The Respondent strongly urges that, in both the pages there is\nno name or signature of buyer or seller.\niii) The Respondent strongly urges that the said loose paper is not in his\nhandwriting.\niv) The Respondent strongly urges that the plot No. 224, Kumbharia was\nregistered by document

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

section 132 (4A) / 292C of the Act.\nii) Dumb papers – The Respondent strongly urges that, in both the pages there is\nno name or signature of buyer or seller.\niii) The Respondent strongly urges that the said loose paper is not in his\nhandwriting.\niv) The Respondent strongly urges that the plot No. 224, Kumbharia was\nregistered by document

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

section 132 (4A) / 292C of the Act.\nii) Dumb papers – The Respondent strongly urges that, in both the pages there is\nno name or signature of buyer or seller.\niii) The Respondent strongly urges that the said loose paper is not in his\nhandwriting.\niv) The Respondent strongly urges that the plot No. 224, Kumbharia was\nregistered by document

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') by\nthe National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax\n(Appeals) [in short, “NFAC/CIT(E)”] all dated 13.08.2024, for the Assessment\nYears (AY) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, which in turn arose out of\nassessment orders passed by Assessing Officer (in short