SAHAKARI KHAND UDUOG MANDAL LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.DCIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG, KAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution\", allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,, NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,GANDEVI vs. ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution\", allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,.,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, , NAVSARI

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

SAHADARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\n34\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE., NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,, NAVASARI

144B of the Act and attendant CBDT Instructions; and whether the\nCIT(A) was justified in mechanically affirming the disallowance by invoking\n\"non-prosecution”, allegedly without dealing with specific contentions and\nmaterials placed on record.\n25.1 The second layer, which is substantive and merits-based, concerns\nthe true nature of the disputed payment – whether, applying the principles\nemanating from

SHREE SAI ALANG HOUSE,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.906/Srt/2024 (Ay 2022-23) (Physical Court Hearing) Shree Sai Alang House Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(1), 13-15, Khodal Chhaya Society, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, बनाम Surat Kamrej Road, Opp. Majura Gate, Vs Shyamdham Mandir, Surat-395 001 Surat-394 185 [Pan : Abefs 8896 D] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 22.03.2024. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action

SHRI NEHRUNAGAR CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY, SURAT,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1(3)(5), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Physical Hearing) Shri Nehrunagar Co.Op. Housing Vs. The Ito, Society, Ward – 1(3)(5), Umang Hall, Nehrunagar Society, Surat Ichchanath Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabas2271H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 19.09.2022. 2. When this appeal was called out for hearing, Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee invited my attention to the order dated 10.07.2023, passed by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shree Madhi Vibhag Khand Udyog Sahakari ITA.506/SRT/2023/AY.2020-21

VEHEVAL MILK PRODUCER CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,SURAT vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

144B of the Act on\n23.09.2022, determining total income at Rs.10,31,059/- by disallowing\ndeduction of interest of Rs.10,18,039/- u/s 80P(d) of the Act.\n4.\nAggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed this appeal before\nthe CIT(A) on 20.04.2023. The CIT(A) observed that assessment order was\npassed on 23.09.2022 and therefore, appeal

VIVEK KHABIA,SURAT vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, ground No. 3 is allowed and ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1072/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Vivek Khabia Income Tax Officer, Ward- H.No.1187-90-91, 1089, Office 2(3)(4), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, बनाम No.411, New Dtc Gheekanta Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 Vs Road, Nr. Bhavani Vad Temple, Haripura, Surat-395 003 [Pan : Avspk 5724 E] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 24.03.2023. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “The appellant prefers an appeal against an order passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 30.08.2024 on following amongst other grounds, each of which are without prejudice to any other

MADHUBEN HARKISHANDAS PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD2(2)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1085/Srt/2024 (Ay 2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Madhuben Harkishandas Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward- 65, Vav Faliyu, Village-Sandhiyer, 2(2)(1), Surat, Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम Surat-394 130 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 Vs [Pan : Azfpp 1116 Q] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 30.05.2023. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, ld. AO erred in reopen the assessment when extraordinary conditions of reopening were not satisfied. 2.That notice issued

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

disallowance of deductions u/s.24(b), Chapter VI-A and Section 16(iii) of the Act, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the relevant grounds because the assessee did not file his return of income u/s 139 or in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. The ld. AR has relied on the decision in case ITA Nos.329

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 , BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

disallowance of deductions u/s.24(b), Chapter VI-A and Section 16(iii) of the Act, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the relevant grounds because the assessee did not file his return of income u/s 139 or in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. The ld. AR has relied on the decision in case ITA Nos.329

MOHMEDAMIN MOHMEDUMAR GENERAL,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

disallowance of Rs.66,48,170/- on account of additional depreciation claimed u/s. 32(1)(iia) In the Return of Income. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Pr. CIT has erred in setting aside the order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. ITA No.522/SRT/2025/AY 2018-19 Mohmedamin Mohmedmar General . 144B

SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT, SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 09.02.2024 and 21.02.2024 by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income- tax - 1, Surat [in short, ‘ld. PCIT’] for the assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 to 2015- 16 and 2016-17 respectively. Since facts are same, with consent of both parties, the cases were heard together

SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT, SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 09.02.2024 and 21.02.2024 by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income- tax - 1, Surat [in short, ‘ld. PCIT’] for the assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 to 2015- 16 and 2016-17 respectively. Since facts are same, with consent of both parties, the cases were heard together

SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA,SURAT vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 09.02.2024 and 21.02.2024 by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income- tax - 1, Surat [in short, ‘ld. PCIT’] for the assessment years (AYs) 2013-14 to 2015- 16 and 2016-17 respectively. Since facts are same, with consent of both parties, the cases were heard together