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

2(1)(1),\nSurat\nस्थायी लेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAABV0106E\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant by\nShri Suresh K. Kabra, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से /Respondent by\nShri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing\n18/02/2025\nउद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 30/04/2025\nआदेश / ORDER\nPER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM:\nThis appeal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. M/S HI-TECH SWEET WATER TECHNOLOGIES(P) LTD., SURAT

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.230/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Hi-Tech Sweet Water Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Technologies (P.) Ltd., 5Th Room No.505, Floor, Vs. 4, Gopal Nagar, Nandeda Char Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Rasta, Gidc, Bardoli–394601 Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach7432C िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23/12/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2023

2) of section 139 should suffer merely because the declaration was not filed physically along with it. The Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1970, which came into force on April 1,1971, has repealed and re-enacted section 184(7) and now the requirement that the declaration should accompany the return has been given up. However, a definite time limit

GEETA PRINTS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(1), SURAT., SURAT

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

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1322/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Geeta Prints Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, 150, Gidc, Pandesara, Vs. Ward -1(1)(1), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Surat-394 221 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacg 88182R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rajesh C. Shah, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03/06/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025

disallowance of various expenses and also the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same. 6. The learned Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax was not justifying making an addition of Rs.7,28,587/- on account of depreciation and also the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same. 7. The learned Asst. Commissioner of Income

SHRI VIJAY CHAMPAK PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.281/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vijay Champak Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pachhlu Faliyu, Near Water Ward-6(4), Surat Tank, Bharthana, Vesu, Surat

2 84,00,000/- 50,00,000/- 28.02.2010 Allowed Penalty by CIT(A) was not levied 3 34,00,000/- 30.04.2011 A.O. made addition, 5 Vijay Champak Patel Assessment Year: 2011-12 69,04,000/- 16,00,000/- 30.09.2011 confirmed by CIT(A) and upheld by ITAT. 08.08.2011 (Penalty levied) 11. On the basis of aforesaid facts the Ld. Counsel

VIJAYBHAI BOOKBINDER,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD- 3(2)(10), SURAT

In the result, ground No. 2 of the\nappeal is allowed and ground No

disallowed the condonation of\ndelay without accepting the fact as explained by assessee.\n3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal.”\n2. Rival submission about the parties have been head and record perused. The\nlearned authorised representative (AR) of the assessee submits that appeal of\nassessee was dismissed by CIT(A) in ex-parte order

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society, engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of white sugar and its by-products such as molasses, press-mud, bagasse and etcetera. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 29/09/2012 declaring NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny. During

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society, engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of white sugar and its by-products such as molasses, press-mud, bagasse and etcetera. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 29/09/2012 declaring NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny. During

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society, engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of white sugar and its by-products such as molasses, press-mud, bagasse and etcetera. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 29/09/2012 declaring NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny. During

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), SURAT vs. SMT. URMI NILESH NAGARSETH, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Smt Urmi Nilesh Nagarseth, Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat C-4, Dharam Palace, B/H. Sneh Sankul Hall, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat-395009. Pan : Abrpn1596Q Appellant Respondednt

2 pertains to rejecting the claim of exemption under section 10(37) and It is therefore prayed that the above action of the Id. AO be quashed and he be directed to allow the exemption under section 10(37) as claimed by the appellant. On the basis of the information received from departmental sources, the AO found that the Surat

SHREE GANESH KHAND UDHYOG,,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

249 & 248/SRT/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtual Court) Shree Ganesh Khand Udhyog Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Ward-2(3), Bharuch. Shri Harisinh Mahida Bhavan, At & Po. Vataria, Tal: Valia, Dist. Bharuch 393001. PAN : AAAAS2139R APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri S N Soparkar-Sr. Advocate, with Ms Urvashi Shodhan- Advocate Respondent by Shri

SHREE GANESH KHAND UDHYOG,,BHARUCH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

249 & 248/SRT/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtual Court) Shree Ganesh Khand Udhyog Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Ward-2(3), Bharuch. Shri Harisinh Mahida Bhavan, At & Po. Vataria, Tal: Valia, Dist. Bharuch 393001. PAN : AAAAS2139R APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri S N Soparkar-Sr. Advocate, with Ms Urvashi Shodhan- Advocate Respondent by Shri

SHRI DINESHBHAI VITTALBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.970/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Shri Dineshbhai Vittalbhai Income Tax Officer, Patel, Ward- 2(3)(7), Surat 6/1261, Bhut Sheri, Mahidharpura Surat Pan: Aatwpp 3597J अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

disallowed the claim under section 10(37) of the Act on the ground that the assessee has sold the land voluntarily, and it is not case of compulsory acquisition of land by SMC. Hence, conditions of section 10(37) of the Act are not satisfied. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Amaratbhai S. Patel

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. SIDDHI VINAYAK KNOTS & PRINTERS PVT. LTD., SURAT

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A Nos. 40, 41, 42, 43 & 115/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Siddhi Vinayak Knots & Prints D.C.I.T., Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Vs. A-26, Central Park, Gidc, Surat. Pandesara, Surat-394221. Pan No. Aamcs 4421 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

249/- on account of alleged bogus purchase by estimation of profit at the rate of 5% of alleged bogus purchase. 4. It is therefore prayed that addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by ld. CIT(A) may please be deleted or the matter may please be set aside to the file of CIT(A). 5. Appellant craves leave

SIDDHI VINAYAK KNOTS & PRINTERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A Nos. 40, 41, 42, 43 & 115/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Siddhi Vinayak Knots & Prints D.C.I.T., Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Vs. A-26, Central Park, Gidc, Surat. Pandesara, Surat-394221. Pan No. Aamcs 4421 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

249/- on account of alleged bogus purchase by estimation of profit at the rate of 5% of alleged bogus purchase. 4. It is therefore prayed that addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by ld. CIT(A) may please be deleted or the matter may please be set aside to the file of CIT(A). 5. Appellant craves leave

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)

2) issued by assessing officer (vide Pb.19 to 22) (iv) Show cause notices issued by assessing officer (vide Pb.23 to 24), (v) Letter filed before Assessing Officer by assessee but not considered by AO (vide Pb.25 to 26), (vi) Screen shot of Reply dated 25.10.2019 filed on ITD Portal (vide Pb.27), (vii) Acknowledgment of Return of Income along with Computation

DHANSUKHBHAI PARAGJIBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1021/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Shri Dhansukhbhai Deputy Commissioner Of Paragjibhai Patel, Income-Tax, 143, Brahaman Faliya, Circle - 2(3) Surat Dindoli Udhna 394210 Pan: Avdpp7007 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

2(3) Surat, in which consolidated order has been passed in I.T.A.No. 1566/Ahd/2016 dated 13.12.2019 for A.Y. 2009-10 as lead case (copy of order filed and placed on record) by which exemption under section 10(37) was allowed in favour of the assessee. 5. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. relied on the orders of lower authorities. However

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-2, SURAT, SURAT vs. M/S. HI-TECH SWEET WATER TECHNOLOGIES (P) LTD., , SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)

2) Without prejudice to ground No.1, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in giving direction by passing order u/s 154 of the Act to the AO de horse provisions of section 80IA(7) of the Act and despite there being no mistake apparent from record in the original order. 3) It is, therefore, prayed that the order

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), SURAT vs. M/S. RAJLAXMI INFRA, SURAT

In the result, this ground of appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.163/Srt/2020 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Rajlaxmi Infra Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Room 64, Rajlaxmi Height, Vs No.410, Aayakar Bhawan, Singanpore Cosway Road, Majura Gate, Opp. Shradhhadeep Soc, Surat-395001 Surat-395004 Pan No. Aaofr 1095 C ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

disallowing purchase only on the ground that party did not file any evidence in response to notice under section 133(6) of the Act. During the assessment, assessee furnished complete details of purchase; like bank statement, bills issued by above parties, ledger account showing payments made on different occasions. Moreover, notice under section 133(6) was duly served