Search: disallowance

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ADDL.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 504/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE DY.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 1935/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ACIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 503/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 501/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 500/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 502/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

234C ought to be levied as per the return of income. 11. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying interest under section 234D of the Act without appreciating the fact that interest under the said section cannot be levied pursuant

DHANSUKHLAL RAMANBHAI MALI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD2(3)(1), SURAT

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

ITA 39/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) Dhansukhlal Ramanbhai Mali, I.T.O., 10, Mali Faliya, Mota Varachha, Ward-2(3)(1), Vs. Surat. Surat. Pan: Aqppm 7151 B Appellant Respondednt

Section 131Section 144ASection 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54ESection 54F

disallowing claim of exemption U/s 54F of the Act from the income of Long Term Capital Gain received on sale of land at Mota Varachha, Surat though a residential house was constructed by utilizing sale consideration received on sale of land and thereby fulfilling all the relevant conditions as prescribed under Section 54F of the Act. On the facts

GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD.,BHARUCH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, ground no.3 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 13/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.13/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Hearing) Gujarat Narmada Valley Deputy Commissioner If Income- Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited, Tax, Circle -2(1)(1), Room No. 403, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P.O. Narmadanagar, Bharuch- – Vs. 392015. Race Course Circle, Vadodara- 390 007 (""थ" /Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacg8372Q िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Yogesh Shah, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 11/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2023

Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 234D

section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) (“CIT(A)”) is bad in law as the order was passed before the expiry of time granted in notice issued

SHREE NARMADA KHAND UDYOG SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,NARMADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1), BHARUCH

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

ITA 104/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)

section 28 but the disallowance of expenditure was done rightly applying principles laid down u/s 37 (1) of the Act. 5. Ld. CIT (A) (NFAC) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the submissions of the assessee that payment of final sugarcane price to the members after completion of the sugarcane season is consistently followed by the assessee society

SHREE NARMADA KHAND UDYOG SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,NARMADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1), BHARUCH

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

ITA 103/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)

section 28 but the disallowance of expenditure was done rightly applying principles laid down u/s 37 (1) of the Act. 5. Ld. CIT (A) (NFAC) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the submissions of the assessee that payment of final sugarcane price to the members after completion of the sugarcane season is consistently followed by the assessee society

SHREE NARMADA KHAND UDYOG SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,NARMADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1), BHARUCH

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

ITA 102/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)

section 28 but the disallowance of expenditure was done rightly applying principles laid down u/s 37 (1) of the Act. 5. Ld. CIT (A) (NFAC) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the submissions of the assessee that payment of final sugarcane price to the members after completion of the sugarcane season is consistently followed by the assessee society

SHRI GORDHANBHAI R. ASODARIA,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT

In the result, the ground No

ITA 267/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Gordhanbhai R. Asodaria, A.C.I.T., 8, Raghuvir Bunglow, City Light Road, Central Circle-3, Vs. Parle Point, Surat-395007. Surat. Pan No. Abapa 6910 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

234C and 234D and when no such interest is chargeable. It may be deleted. 4. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case, the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in dismissing ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal before him challenging initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) on the ground that

R.S. TRADELINK PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2130/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2130/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S. R.S. Tradelink Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Plot No.17, Magdalla Port Road, Of Income Tax, Circle-4, Surat. Magdalla, Surat-395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr6607A (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah - CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra - CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

234C is charged as per calculation given in ITNS-150 which is part of this order. Issue notice under section 271(l)(c) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” From the above (A), (B) and (C) analysis it is abundantly clear that in the assessment order itself the assessing officer has made different charge

SAANIKA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and partly allowed set-aside for statistical purposes

ITA 208/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: C .M. Garg & O. P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.208/Ahd/2016/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Saanika Industries Pvt. Ltd., V. Deputy Commissioner Of Block No. 1053, Village Tradekeshwar, Income-Tax, Near Hariyal Bus Stop, Tal- Mandvi, Circle -2(1)(2) Surat District-Surat 394230 Pan: Aajcs 6782P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee By Shri Hiren R. Vepari, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. D.R. राज"व क" ओर से Revenue By 29.10.2018 सुनवाई क" तारीख Date Of Hearing 01.11.2018 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /Order Per O. P. Meena, Am 1. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Surat (In Short “Cit(A)”) Dated 07.12.2015 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Ground No. I- Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs. 10 Lakhs From M/S. Sadasukh Dealers Pvt. Ltd. , When The Amount Is Received By Account Payee Cheques & Confirmation, Bank Statement

Section 234A

disallowance so made by the AO are deleted. This ground is therefore, allowed. 9. Ground No. IV: regarding charging of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C

MANISH BHOGILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

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

ITA 687/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.687/Srt/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Manish Bhogilal Shah The Income Tax Officer-3 बनाम/ 6/B, Crown Mansion Navsari – 396 445 V/S. Ground Floor Forjeet Street, Cross Lane, Mumbai – 400 026 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acqps 6699 F (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) (!) यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08 /12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27 /02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 27/12/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Manish Bhogilal Shah Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18 2

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 68Section 69C

234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Ground 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming invocation of penalty provisions under Section 271AAC, 270A and 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Ground 9. Appellant craves leave to add further grounds OR to amend

M/S. SHASHVAT JEWELS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT

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

ITA 3364/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No3364/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2007-08 M/S. Shashvat Jewels Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax, 6/1468, Shashvat House, Circle-2(1)(2) Surat Kansara Street, Mahidharpura, Surat 395003 Pan:Aajcs 9790D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143Section 148Section 68

disallow the 100% bogus purchases. It is obvious that there cannot be any sales without purchases. We find that the quantity records are maintained. We further notice that the Hon`ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mayank Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [Tax Appeal No. 200 of 2003] dated 17.11.2014 wherein the Hon`ble High Court has observed

M/S. DELUX DIAMONDS,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1),, SURAT

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

ITA 1396/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C .M. Garg & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 132(4)Section 143Section 148Section 234B

234C of the Act. 3. Ground no. 1 to 3 are interconnected and relates to addition of Rs. 1,41,28,605 made on account of bogus purchases, hence, these are being considered together. 4. Succinctly, facts as culled out from the orders of lower authorities are that the assessee is a partnership firm and had filed return of income

SHRI JAGDISHCHANDRA BABUBHAI NAGARSHETH,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3350/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2008-09 Jagdishchandra Babubhai Nagarsheth, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 11/497, Nagarsheth House, Ward-9(2), Surat. Nagarsheth Street, Vadachauta, Chowk Bazar, Surat – 395 003. [Pan: Aanpn 0554 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hiren R. Vepari – Ca Department By Shri R.P.Rastogi – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2019 Order Per H.S. Sidhu, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-V, Surat Dated 09.10.2014 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Ground Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under: “(I) Validity Of The Order: (1) The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Dated 09-10-2014 Is Not Valid As It Has Not Taken Into Consideration The Facts, The Evidences & The Judgements Brought Before Him. (2) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Is Required To Be Cancelled.

Section 10(37)Section 234A

234C of the Act. (2) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. At the time of hearing, the ld.Counsel for the assessee stated that the issue in dispute has already been adjudicated and decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT Surat Bench, Surat in the assessee’s own case

SMT. BHAVNABEN ARVINDBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in in ITA No

ITA 577/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.576/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Smt.Hemanginiben B Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 28, Sangam Society, Parle Point, Surat. Income Tax, Circle-3, Surat. S. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afipp 2238 Q (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.577/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Bhavnaben Arvindbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 27, Adarshnagar Society, Ambatalawadi S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Katargam, Surat – 395004. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 4358 M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.578/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Ritaben Niravbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 1003-1004, Santvan Heights, S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Laxmikant Ashram Road, Katargam, Surat. Surat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alxpp 0357 M (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi - Ca Respondent By : Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. Cit(A)], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Order & Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi - CAFor Respondent: Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271A

disallowance is uncalled for. The Assessing Officer may be directed to delete the same. 1.2 In law and in the facts and circumstances of the assessee's case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that document furnished during the course of assessment proceedings i.e. invoice copies, confirmation of account with PAN details, bank statement evidencing payment through regular

SMT. RITA BEN NIRAVBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in in ITA No

ITA 578/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.576/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Smt.Hemanginiben B Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 28, Sangam Society, Parle Point, Surat. Income Tax, Circle-3, Surat. S. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afipp 2238 Q (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.577/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Bhavnaben Arvindbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 27, Adarshnagar Society, Ambatalawadi S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Katargam, Surat – 395004. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 4358 M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.578/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Ritaben Niravbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 1003-1004, Santvan Heights, S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Laxmikant Ashram Road, Katargam, Surat. Surat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alxpp 0357 M (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi - Ca Respondent By : Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. Cit(A)], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Order & Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi - CAFor Respondent: Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271A

disallowance is uncalled for. The Assessing Officer may be directed to delete the same. 1.2 In law and in the facts and circumstances of the assessee's case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that document furnished during the course of assessment proceedings i.e. invoice copies, confirmation of account with PAN details, bank statement evidencing payment through regular