SURESHKUMAR MAVJIBHAI BHINGARADIA, INDIVIDUAL,BHARUCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Sureshkumar Mavjibhai Bhingaradia, Vs. The Acit, Plot No.3441/B, Near Pci Chowkdi, Circle – 2(1)(1), Gidc Estate, Bharuch - 393002 Vadodara "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acqpb6047G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Advocate Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/02/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 01.03.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC

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

disallowance of Rs.1,250 made out of telephone expenses. 103. We have dismissed this ground of revenue hence, this ground becomes infructuous. 104. Ground No.7 : states that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly directed not to exclude the following amounts from the profits eligible for deduction under section

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

disallowance of Rs.1,250 made out of telephone expenses. 103. We have dismissed this ground of revenue hence, this ground becomes infructuous. 104. Ground No.7 : states that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly directed not to exclude the following amounts from the profits eligible for deduction under section

M/S N. A. SHAIKH,ANKLESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S N.A. Shaikh, I.T.O., Shop No. 1, Old Shopping Centre, Ward 2(5), Vs. Nr. Pratin Crossing, Gidc, Bharuch. Ankleshwar-393002. Pan No. Aabfn 9617 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The M/s N.A. Shaikh Vs ITO ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has a good case on merit and likely to succeed if the assessee is to be heard and the appeal is to be decided on merit. The ld AR for the assessee submits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VAPI vs. GUJARAT POLYSOL CHEMICALS LIMITED, VAPI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed

disallowed\nonly 25% of purchase on the basis of decision of Hon'ble\njurisdictional High Curt in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. vs. CIT\n(2015). The Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue submits that addition\nmade by the Assessing Officer to the extent of 25% of inflated\npurchase may be restricted by reversing finding of Ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)(1), SURAT vs. ENVIRO CONTROL PVT. LTD., SURAT

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.274 & 307/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2017-18) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Enviro House, Opp. Bank Of Surat, Room No.108, 1St Floor, Maharshtra, Ghod Dod Road, Surat- Aayakar Bhawan, Majura 395007 Gate, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 8700 C (Assessee) (Respondent)

250 (SC) ITA.274 & 307/SRT/2022/AYs.13-14 & 17-18 Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd. (b) PCIT vs.IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186 (Del) CBDT Circular No.5/2014 dated 11-2-2014 cannot override express provisions of Section 14A, read with rule 8D. Where no exempt income was earned in relevant assessment year, merely because tax auditor had suggested in tax audit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT vs. ENVIRO CONTROL PVT. LTD., , SURAT

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.274 & 307/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2017-18) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Enviro House, Opp. Bank Of Surat, Room No.108, 1St Floor, Maharshtra, Ghod Dod Road, Surat- Aayakar Bhawan, Majura 395007 Gate, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 8700 C (Assessee) (Respondent)

250 (SC) ITA.274 & 307/SRT/2022/AYs.13-14 & 17-18 Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd. (b) PCIT vs.IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186 (Del) CBDT Circular No.5/2014 dated 11-2-2014 cannot override express provisions of Section 14A, read with rule 8D. Where no exempt income was earned in relevant assessment year, merely because tax auditor had suggested in tax audit

BALA FILLING STATION,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shripawan Singh& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.822/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybridhearing) Bala Filling Station Vs. The Acit, Opp. Geb Substation, Jambusar Circle - 1, Road,Jambusar - 392150, Gujarat Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagfb8418F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’),dated 10.06.2024by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘CIT(A)’]for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assesseeare as under: “1.The Appellant prays and an appeal that the learned CIT Appeals NFAC has erred

VAMA INFRA,SURAT vs. DY.CIT CRICLE-2(1)(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.406/Srt/2023 (A.Y. 2016-17) (Hearing In Physical Court) Vama Infra Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ground Floor Veronaa Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Aayakar Vs Residency, Harikrishna Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Campus Vraj Chowk, Surat- 395001 395001 Pan : Aakfv 3593 K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

disallowing closing stock for verification of Rs.2,34,48,560/- (20% of total closing stock). 4. On the fats and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition on account of unexplained expenditure of Rs.1

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

AALIDHRA TEXFAB PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. CPC CURRENT JURISDICTION- DCIT,CIRCLE 1(1)(1),SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.153/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing) Aalidhara Texfab Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Cpc, 2, Functional Estate, New Industrial Current Jurisdiction: Estate, Road No.6, Udhna, Surat – Dcit, Circle – 1(1)(1), 394210, Gujarat Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasca8215E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/08/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 31.12.2024, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), Addl/JCIT(A) - 9, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well

VARNIRAJ TAXTILES,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) Varniraj Textiles, I.T.O., M-31, Bombay Market, Umarwada, Ward-1(2)(5), Vs. Surat-395010. Surat. Pan No. Aaifv 0327 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee has sought adjournment as the assessee has filed application under the provisions of Right to 2 Varniraj Textiles Vs ITO Information Act (RTI Act) for seeking certain information and document from the record of Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) instead of granting sufficient time to the assessee, confirmed

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

section 54F of the Act. As such, the deduction of Rs.52,04,000/- claimed by the assessee u/s 54F is disallowed and added to the total income of 3 Vijay Champak Patel Assessment Year: 2011-12 the assessee. By claiming incorrect deduction, the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income, for which, penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) r.w.s

KETAN BHIKHUBHAI PATEL,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD 5, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1370/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Ketan Bhikhubhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, Vav Faliya, At Dungri Via Udwada (R.S) Ward - 5, Tal Udwada, Dungri (Udava Rs) B.O, Vapi Dungri, Valsad, 396185 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aphpp0922Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 09.01.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The learned CIT, NFAC has erred and was not just

YOGESHKUMAR MANAHARLAL HAJARIWALA,BHARUCH vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1271/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Processing Hearing) Yogeshkumar Manaharlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ Hajariwala 3(2)(1), Surat, Room # 416, Vs. A/6, Ambiika Niketan, B/H Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Jalaram Mandir, Diva Road, Surat-395 001 Ankleshwar, Bharuch-395 004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajmpt 4689 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/03/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 24.01.2024 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Mumbai [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 09.12.2019. Grounds of appeal

TEJAS ARVINDKUMAR DESAI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(3), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Tejas Arvindkumar Desai Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 202/302, Guru Pushya Ward-1(3)(3), Surat, Income Tax Vs. Apartment, Maskati Plot, Officer, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Parle Point, Surat-395 007 Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipn 4702 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 21.12.2023 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short

KHODIYAR MOTORS,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shrisanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.729/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Khodiyar Motors Vs. Dcit, 1-2-3, Green Park, Surat Circle - 2(3), Navsari Road, Unn-Sachin, Surat Surat - 394230 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaffk4882M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे/Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca राज"कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 14/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/11/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 28.05.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2013-14. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well

SAGAR EMBROTECH,SURAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -1(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Sagar Embrotech, A.C.I.T., 94, Village Popada Hojiwala Circle-1(2), Vs. Industrial Estate, Gate No. 2, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Sachin Palsana Road, Gate, Surat. Surat-394230. Pan No. Abrfs 9325 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal in an ex parte order. I find that the order of ld. CIT(A) is cryptic and not in accordance with mandate of Section 250