ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1), SURAT vs. PANDESARA GREEN ENVIRONMENT WATER WELFARE COOP. SOCIETY LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

disallowed the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs. 1.49 crore by taking a view that Sutex Cooperative Bank is not covered by the provisions of Section 80P(2)(d) as it is not a cooperative society. The assessee filed copy of registration certificate of Sutex Cooperative bank as a society. The ld. CIT(A) further

ALIDHARA TEXSPIN ENGINEERS,DADRA UT OF D & NH vs. THE ACIT., VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI

In the result, assessee`s appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.446/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Alidhara Texspin Engineers Assistant Commissioner Of Income Plot No.2, Block No.122,Vaghdhara Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi Vs. Road, Dadra "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifa 2434 N (Appellant ) (Respondent)

690/-. Thus, it is apparent that, the AO was not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of expenses of Rs.48,967/-. This fulfils the requirement of provision of sec. 14A(2) of the Act. Even the appellant has claimed that the voluntary disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was made @ 1% of the dividend income meaning thereby that this

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 made under section 40A(2)(b) of Rs.5,912 without appreciating that payment made to related party for purchase of material was excessive as compared to other party. 150. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the CIT (A) has deleted this ground by observing that the assessee has purchased

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 made under section 40A(2)(b) of Rs.5,912 without appreciating that payment made to related party for purchase of material was excessive as compared to other party. 150. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the CIT (A) has deleted this ground by observing that the assessee has purchased

GUJARAT MITRA PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.32 & 33/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2017-18 & 2018-19) (Virtual Court Hearing) Gujarat Mitra Pvt. Ltd. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Ward No.10, Soni Faliya, Chowk Centralized Processing Center, Vs. Bazar, Surat-395003 Bangalore-560500 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcg 2528 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide order dated 12.03.2021 and 28.09.2020 respectively. 2. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are common and identical except variance of amounts, therefore, both the appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience

GUJARAT MITRA PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.32 & 33/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2017-18 & 2018-19) (Virtual Court Hearing) Gujarat Mitra Pvt. Ltd. Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Ward No.10, Soni Faliya, Chowk Centralized Processing Center, Vs. Bazar, Surat-395003 Bangalore-560500 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcg 2528 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide order dated 12.03.2021 and 28.09.2020 respectively. 2. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are common and identical except variance of amounts, therefore, both the appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience

VAPI MERCHANT SAVING & CREDIT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,VAPI vs. THE PCIT, VALSAD, VALSAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.107/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Virtual Court Hearing) Vapi Merchant Saving & Credit Co. Vs. The Pcit, Valsad. Op. Society, 130, 1St Floor Varun Complex, Opp. Reliance Super Market, Gidc, Vapi – 396195. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaav3925E

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co- operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion

SHREE MADHI SURAG STAFF CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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.220/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2017-18) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shree Madhi Sugar Staff Co-Op Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Credit Society Ltd. Madhi Ta: Vs. Central Processing Centre (Cpc), Bardoli, Surat-394340. Bengaluru-560500 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas 3360 C अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks however, the said earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion we are the considered view that order passed

THE GOVERNMENT E CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VADODARA-1, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.126/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Virtual Court) The Government E Co- Principal Commissioner Of Operative Society Ltd./, Income Tax, Vadodara-1, Vs First Floor, Government Room No.214, 2Nd Floor, Sevasadan, Bhag-2, B/H Aaykar Bhawan, Race Course Pwd Office, Bharuch- Circle, Vadodara-390007 392001 Pan No. Aaalt 0832 D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion

ABRAMA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.178/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Abrama Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., At V Income Tax Department, Navsari & Po. Abrama, Tal. Jalalpore, Dist. Circle, Navsari S. Navsari-396 445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaaa 1075 G (Appellant ) (Respondent)

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion

NAVAPURA URBAN CO-OP CREDIT & CONSUMER SOCIETY LTD.,SURAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Navapura Urban Co-Op Credit & A.C.I.T., Consumer Society Ltd., Circle 1(2), Vs. 9/572, Siddhi, Kotsafil Main Road, Surat. Surat-395002 (Gujarat) Pan No. Aaaan 0539 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion

VAPI MERCHANT SAVING & CREDIT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,VAPI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Vapi Marchant Saving & Credit I.T.O., Cooperative Society Limited, E-Assessment Centre, Vs. Office No. 130, First Floor, Varun Delhi. Complex, Opp. Reliance Super Market Gide, Vapi (Gujarat). Pan No. Aaaav 3925 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

690 (Rajkot Tribunal) also held the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion

MANJU GEMS,SURAT vs. THE INCOME-TAX, WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT., SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Diesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section 69C of the Act and also the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same The ld AO has erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,26,57,724/-being a bogus and non- genuine purchase and therefore disallowed u/s 690

THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI vs. M/S. BILAG INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,, VAPI

In the result, a part of ground no

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2446/Ahd/2007 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2004-05) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Vapi Circle, Vs. Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd., Vapi. (Formerly Known As M/S. Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd.), 306/3, Ii Phase G.I.D.C, Vapi, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcb 2100L (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee) Shri A. Gopalkrishnan, Ca Assessee By Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/05/2022 17/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2004- 05, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad (In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”], In Appeal No. Cit(A)/Vls/371/06- 07, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

690/- Total Rs.33,97,072/- Less: rent Received from Bajaj Alliance Rs.11,27,010/- The amount sustained by Ld CIT(A) 22,70,062/- The assessee argued before assessing officer that all the above credits written back have direct nexus with the manufacturing business. However, assessing officer held that aforesaid amount has no nexus with business of assessee hence excluded

SHREE MADHI SURALI VIBHAG NAGRIK SAHAKARI DHIRAN MANDALI LTD,,SURAT vs. PR.CIT-2,SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shree Madhi Surali Vibhag The Principal Nagriksahakari Dhiran Mandali Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Ltd., Tax-2, Surat. At & Po Madhi, Tal. Bardoli, Surat – 394340. Pan: Aadas 5644 L Applicant Respondent

disallowed other interest income of Rs.13,62,958/- earned from Nationalised Bank while passing the assessment order. These facts are clearly discernible from para 4 of the assessment order. We find the ld. Pr. CIT by examining the record, took a different view that the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section

ITO, WARD-3(2)(2), SURAT vs. SHRI PRAVINBHAI MANUBHAI PATEL, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) I.T.O., Shri Pravinbhai Manubhai Patel, Ward 3(2)(2), 311, Mohandeep Society, Behind Vs. Surat. Haridarshan Society, Ved Road, Surat. Pan No. Aiipp 4526 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

690/-. Subsequently, the case of assessee was reopened by the Assessing officer on 28/07/2015. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was served upon the assessee. The case of assessee was reopened by the Assessing officer by 2 ITO Vs Sh. Pravinbhai Manubhai Patel taking a view that on perusal of profit and loss account, it was noted that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VAPI vs. LALIT GARG (HUF), MUMBAI

Accordingly. These appeals are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl. आयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Appeal(S) By :

690 of the Act rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee u/s. 145(3), and estimating the disallowance 25% of total URD purchases, whereas in the instant year the disallowance was made u/s. 40A(3) of the Act as assessee made cash payment in excess of Rs.20,000/- for URD purchases. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances

LALIT GARG (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VAPI

Accordingly. These appeals are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl. आयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Appeal(S) By :

690 of the Act rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee u/s. 145(3), and estimating the disallowance 25% of total URD purchases, whereas in the instant year the disallowance was made u/s. 40A(3) of the Act as assessee made cash payment in excess of Rs.20,000/- for URD purchases. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances