M/S. MITSU PRIVATE LIMITED,,VAPI vs. THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

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

section 80HHC. The action of the AO is contrary to the facts and law. 41. The Ld.AO relying on the Hon`ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. Sterling Foods [1999] 237 ITR 579 (SC) has disallowed

ACIT, VALSAD CIRCLE , , VALSAD vs. SHEEL ENGINEERS, VALSAD

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. 727/Srt/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Acit, Valsad Circle, Vs. Sheel Engineers, Valsad. 14, Bcda Shopping Centre-5, Morarji Desai Road, Valsad-396001. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfs5915R

section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 29.12.2017. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as follows: “i) Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,48,20,237/- by ignoring

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowed such claim for want of Form 10B, which was not furnished alongwith return of income or before filing return of income. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of CPC/Assessing officer by holding that the assessee has not furnished any application if any for seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10B from CIT(Exemption). I find that

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowed such claim for want of Form 10B, which was not furnished alongwith return of income or before filing return of income. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of CPC/Assessing officer by holding that the assessee has not furnished any application if any for seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10B from CIT(Exemption). I find that

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowed such claim for want of Form 10B, which was not furnished alongwith return of income or before filing return of income. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of CPC/Assessing officer by holding that the assessee has not furnished any application if any for seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10B from CIT(Exemption). I find that

HAMILTON HOUSEWARES PRIVATE LIMITED,DAMAN & DIU vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD

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.163/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Virtual Hearing) Hamilton Houseware Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit, Valsad. Plot No.49/50, Danydyog Industrial Estate, Piparia 396230, Dadra & Nagar Haveli. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcd1683Q

disallowable expenditure after considering the financial ITA 163/SRT/2022/AY.2017-18 Hamilton Housewares Pvt. Ltd. documents and other relevant details/submissions filed by the assessee and as available on record with a view to ensure that there is no discrepancy in the facts and figures on record." One of the main grounds which appealed to the Commissioner was that the prescribed authority

MUKESH ARVINDLAL VAKHARIA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(3), SURAT

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.491/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Mukesh Arvindlal Vakharia, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), C/O Arvind Silk Mills, Om Baug, Ashvini Surat. Kumar Road, Surat - 395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abcpv1682L

237 (Ahd. Trib.) is distinguishable on facts and Mukesh Arvindlal Vakharia not applicable to the facts of assessee`s case in view of the fact that in said case there was no advance money received and the applicability of CBDT Circular No.359 (F. No.207/8/82.IT) dated 10.05.1983 was not brought on record wherein it is claimed that “as section 54E contemplated

NAVBHARAT CHERITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHARUCH

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi Jhagadia, Bharuch, Ward-1, Vs. Gujarat, Pin-393115 Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowed such claim for want of Form 10B, which was not furnished alongwith return of income or before filing return of income. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of CPC/Assessing officer by holding that the assessee has not furnished any application if any for seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10B from CIT(Exemption). I find that

MADHVI AJITKUMAR RANKA ,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Madhvi Ajitkumar Ranka, Vs. Acit, 88, Sunder Nagar, Jamalpore, Navsari Circle, Navsari – 396445 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahfpr5791K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Darshit J. Naik, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

section 142(1) of the Act were issued, requesting the assessee to furnish various details. The Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) observed that assessee has shown gift income of Rs.44,61,237/- and credited the same in her capital account. Therefore, to verify the genuineness of the gift, the assessee was requested to furnish ITA No.124/SRT/2025/AY 2017-18 Madhvi Ajitkumar

RAJ ABHISHEK CORPORATION,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-1, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.117/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Raj Abhishek Corporation Principal Commissioner Of Income 501,Kohinoortextiles Market, Tax, Surat-1, Room No.123, Aaykar Vs. Ring Road, Surat-395002 Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat—395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfr 6297 D (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ketan Jagirdar, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-D.R

disallowance in respect of deduction claimed u/s 80-IB of the Act. Thus, Ld. PCIT noted that Assessing Officer has passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 16.12.2019 without making inquiries which should have been made and without application of mind. This make the order erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest

SHRI JIVRAJBHAI H. BALAR,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08, ( IT(SS)A Nos

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.150 To 154/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2004-05 To 2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, The Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1245/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) Jivrajbhai Harkhabhai Balar, Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-1, 59, Kantareshwar Society, Surat. Katargam Road, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abopb8649M (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of the claim of ‘Capital Loss’ of the appellant and the addition u/s 50C(1) of the I.T. Act.” 17. On merits, the ld CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee, partly observing as follows: “19. In the revised grounds of appeal, also addition u/s 50C(1) has been challenged. However, the premiums paid / payable for conversion

M/S. SAMRIDDHI CORPORATION,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT

In the result, cross appeals of Revenue as well as Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Samruddhi Corporation, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Megh Dhwani Complex, Income Tax, Circle-1(2), City Light Road, Surat – 395007. Surat. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Samruddhi Corporation, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat. Megh Dhwani Complex, City Light Road, Surat – 395007. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of certain expenses u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The provisions of section 147 have undergone a drastic change since 01.04.89. The leading case on this issue is that of Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society, 119 ITR 996 wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the opinion of the Internal Audit Party on a point of law could

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. SAMRUDDHI CORPORATION,, SURAT

In the result, cross appeals of Revenue as well as Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10 Samruddhi Corporation, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Megh Dhwani Complex, Income Tax, Circle-1(2), City Light Road, Surat – 395007. Surat. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Samruddhi Corporation, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat. Megh Dhwani Complex, City Light Road, Surat – 395007. [Pan: Aaofm 5334 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of certain expenses u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The provisions of section 147 have undergone a drastic change since 01.04.89. The leading case on this issue is that of Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society, 119 ITR 996 wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the opinion of the Internal Audit Party on a point of law could

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6, SURAT vs. SHRI AJAY DHANSUKHBHAI PATEL, SURAT

In the result,appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.290/Ahd/2016/Srt "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Shri Ajaykumar Dhansukhbhai Circle-2(3), Patel, Surat. Ishwar Krupa, B/H Anand Park, Althan, Althan Bharthana, Tal-Choriyasi, Dist. Surat – 395 007. [Pan:Amapp 3980A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Mehul R. Shah, C.A ""यथ"क"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shridileep Kumar, Sr. D.R सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06-07-2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-07-2018

disallowance of deduction u/s. 54B of the Act. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the AO has not carried out any independent enquiry or collected any evidence to establish that income of Rs. 4,63,237/- was not from agricultural activity but earned by him from

RAJHANS METALS,,NA vs. ARIVS.THE PR. CIT-1,, VALSAD

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

237/- and most of these payments are shown to have been made in the month of January to March, 2012 on the dates in near vicinity of each other. The total payments to these parties amount to Rs.1.42 crores and the other payments have been made in cheque which shows that the party is having a bank account

USHABEN VINODBHAI BELADIYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.246/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Ushaben Vinodbhai Beladiya, Vs. The Ito, No.237, Vikram Nagar Society, Ward – 3(3)(1), Near Trikam Nagar, L.H. Road, Surat Surat – 395006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aimpb4673N (Assessee) (Respondent)

237 ITR 570 (SC) (ii) Narendra G. Goradia vs. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 571 (Bombay)(HC) (iii) Lakshmi Rice Mills vs. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 258 (Pat.) (HC) ITA.246/SRT/2022/AY.2017-18 Ushaben Vinodbhai Beladiya (iv) Gur Prasad Hari Das vs. CIT [1957] 32 ITR 56 (All.)(HC) (v) Kanpur Steel

M/S. BALAR EXPORTS,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT. CIRCLE-1,, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No’S.3188 & 3189/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 1. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 1.M/S. Balar Exports, Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Balar Building, Opp. Surat. Panchratna Tower, Lambe Hanuman Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aacfb 4703 H] 2.M/S. Balar Exports, 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Balar Building, Opp. Income Tax, Central Panchratna Tower, Lambe Circle-1, Surat. Hanuman Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aacfb 4703 H] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah - Ca Shri Srinivas T. Bidari - Cit(D.R.) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 11.12.2019 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 04.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Am: 1. The Above Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Ahmedabad (In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 19.10.2011 For The Assessment Year 2008-09, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Dated 31.12.2010 Of Balar Exports V. Dcit-Cc-1-Surat & Vice- Versa /I.T.A.No’S. 3189 & 3188/Ahd/2011/A.Y.2008-09 Page 2 Of 49

disallowance of such expenses can be made during year under consideration u/s.69C of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) observed that out of alleged unaccounted manufacturing expenses of Rs.10,81,01,908/-, the amount of Rs.6,04,11,050/- only could be determined and the remaining amount was pertaining to the financial year 2006-07 asper notings in Page

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, SURAT vs. M/S. BALAR EXPORTS,, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No’S.3188 & 3189/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 1. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 1.M/S. Balar Exports, Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Balar Building, Opp. Surat. Panchratna Tower, Lambe Hanuman Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aacfb 4703 H] 2.M/S. Balar Exports, 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Balar Building, Opp. Income Tax, Central Panchratna Tower, Lambe Circle-1, Surat. Hanuman Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aacfb 4703 H] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah - Ca Shri Srinivas T. Bidari - Cit(D.R.) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 11.12.2019 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 04.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Am: 1. The Above Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Ahmedabad (In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 19.10.2011 For The Assessment Year 2008-09, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Dated 31.12.2010 Of Balar Exports V. Dcit-Cc-1-Surat & Vice- Versa /I.T.A.No’S. 3189 & 3188/Ahd/2011/A.Y.2008-09 Page 2 Of 49

disallowance of such expenses can be made during year under consideration u/s.69C of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) observed that out of alleged unaccounted manufacturing expenses of Rs.10,81,01,908/-, the amount of Rs.6,04,11,050/- only could be determined and the remaining amount was pertaining to the financial year 2006-07 asper notings in Page