RAJVI CORPORATION,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-3(2), SURAT
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on ground No
ITA 12/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 12/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S. Rajvi Corporation, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-3(2)(2), D-3, Om Final Plot No. 108, Bombay Surat. Food Compound Kasanagar Road, Nr. Idbi Bank Katargam, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaofr0631E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ronak Parekh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A),-3/10473/2016-17 Dated 19.07.2019, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].
For Appellant: Shri Ronak Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)
47,760/- office rent expense of Rs.1,76,000/- and late payment to EPF/ESIC of Rs.42,805/-. The assessing officer observed that the additions were made on account of electricity expense as part of the expenses was disallowed as the business premises were shared by other concerns who had claimed electricity expense separately. Similarly, the rental expenses were also disallowed
