THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. MITSU LIMITED,, DAMAN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

disallowed the same on estimate basis without any justification. Hence, same are directed to be allowed. This ground of appeal is therefore, allowed. 8. Ground No. 5 & 6 : states that Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO in not considering the claim of the assessee that the entire receipt to the tune of Rs.23

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. VS. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari VS. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. Vs. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari Vs. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. VS. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari VS. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. vs. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari vs. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. VS. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari VS. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

211 to 214/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi, Navsari - 396360, Gujarat. VS. ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAAS3791B (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos. 218 to 221/SRT/2020 (AYs: 2011-12 to 2014-15) ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari VS. Sahakari Khand Udhyog Mandal Ltd. Gandevi Sugar, Gandevi, Tal. Gandevi

SHRI LABHUBHAI RAVJIBHAI JASANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(7) , SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Labhubhai Ravjibhai Jasani, I.T.O., 17-18, Astvinayak Row House, Ward-1(3)(7), Vs. Nr. Parshuram Garden, Adajan, Surat. Surat-395009. Pan No. Abnpj 1872 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The Assessing Officer made disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS on interest payment paid to HDB Financial Services Ltd. which is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC). The assessee paid only interest of Rs. 34,86,211

DIVYABEN PRAFULCHANDRA PARMAR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1), SURAT

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.73/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Divyaben Prafulchand Parmar, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(3)(1), 1-2, Harikrishna Niwas, B/H Braham Surat. Kumari Ashram, Bhatar Road, Surat – 395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acbpp9559Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

211 days by holding as under: "3. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the application for condonation of delay, we are of the considered opinion that assessee was under a bona fide belief that the impugned order of Pr. CIT was not appealable before this Tribunal since they were

NIMESH KANUBHAI TOPIWALA - HUF,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Nimesh Kanubhai Topiwala-Huf, D.C.I.T., B-801, Shri Sarjan Palace, Nr. Nandini Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 3, Vip Road, Vesu, Surat, Surat. Gujarat-395007. Pan No. Aahhn 1784 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowed by the CPC. The recipient of salary and professional fee y have included such professional fees and salary in their taxable income and has paid taxes thereon. Thus, the assessee is eligible for benefit of Proviso to Section 201 of the Act and the assessee fulfilled all four conditions that the recipient has furnished return of income within

KALUBHAI DULABHAI GOLAVIYA,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, , SURAT

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.15 & Ita No.619/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 &2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Kalubhai Dulabhai Golaviya Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, B/1-2, Jalaram Society, B/H. Central Circle-2, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Gurunagar Society, Varachha Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Road, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 5116 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

211 of PB). d. Intention at the time of acquisition of land is more important than subsequent non utilization of said land, e. The Assessee was aware of the various problems and difficulties which lay ahead and hence, it cannot be accepted that the said land was not developable 8. Before the CIT (A), the Assessee made detailed submissions which

HEMANT ISHWARLAL DESAI,SURAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri O.P.Meena, Am Hemant Ishwarlal Desai Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-3(1) 305-306, Mahima Heights, Nr. Shardayatan Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat. School, Chandani Chowk, Surat-395007. Pan/Gir No.Abkpd0745Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah Revenue By Ms. Smitha V. Nair (Sr. Dr)

disallowance of Rs.46,51,562/- relating to flat at Candolim Apartment, Bardez — Goa is deleted and ground of appeal is allowed.” 5. On appraisal of the above said finding, we noticed that the Hon’ble ITAT has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of decision of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Nilesh Pravin Vora and Yatin

ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), SURAT vs. VIMALCHAND MANIKCHAND JAIN, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are partly allowed and the grounds raised in Cross Objection by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of Rs. 84,06,994/- being 5% of suspicious purchases amount Rs. 16,81,39,885/- by treating the same as non-genuine, which has not been claimed as expenses in Profit & Loss Account in view of the fact that the respondent acted as commission agent on behalf of principals and commission income on such transactions have already been

ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), SURAT vs. VIMALCHAND MANIKCHAND JAIN, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are partly allowed and the grounds raised in Cross Objection by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of Rs. 84,06,994/- being 5% of suspicious purchases amount Rs. 16,81,39,885/- by treating the same as non-genuine, which has not been claimed as expenses in Profit & Loss Account in view of the fact that the respondent acted as commission agent on behalf of principals and commission income on such transactions have already been

ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), SURAT vs. VIMALCHAND MANIKCHAND JAIN, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are partly allowed and the grounds raised in Cross Objection by assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowance of Rs. 84,06,994/- being 5% of suspicious purchases amount Rs. 16,81,39,885/- by treating the same as non-genuine, which has not been claimed as expenses in Profit & Loss Account in view of the fact that the respondent acted as commission agent on behalf of principals and commission income on such transactions have already been

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. BETEX INDIA LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

211 Taxman 61/25 taxmann.com 227, Filatex India Ltd. (supra) decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Canara Housing Development Company (supra) as well as the other decisions, held thus: "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions

BETEX INDIA LIMITED,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

211 Taxman 61/25 taxmann.com 227, Filatex India Ltd. (supra) decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Canara Housing Development Company (supra) as well as the other decisions, held thus: "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT, SURAT vs. DHANPRIYA PRINTS PVT. LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

211 Taxman 61/25 taxmann.com 227, Filatex India Ltd. (supra) decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Canara Housing Development Company (supra) as well as the other decisions, held thus: "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions