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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharuch Enviro Deputy Commissioner Of Infrastructure Ltd.117-118, Income Tax, Bharuch Vs Gidc Estate-393002 Circle, Pan : Aaacb 8075 F Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

u/s 115JB of the Act. The appellant hereby reserves the right to add to, alter or amplify the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed

ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ACIT.,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharuch Enviro Deputy Commissioner Of Infrastructure Ltd.117-118, Income Tax, Bharuch Vs Gidc Estate-393002 Circle, Pan : Aaacb 8075 F Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

u/s 115JB of the Act. The appellant hereby reserves the right to add to, alter or amplify the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed

SHRI SHASHIKUMAR S. MISHRA,,BHARUCH vs. THE DY.CIT, BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No. 2769/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2011-12 Shri Sashi Kumar Mishra, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of A/7, Ashirwad Nagar Society Income-Tax, Circle – Bholav, Bharuch 392001 Bharuch Pan:Aoqpm 4008 N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

u/s. 234B/234C and 234D of the Act. 13. We are of the view that this ground is consequential in nature, however, we make it clear that the charging of interest is mandatory as held by Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjum M. H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1 (SC). Therefore, it is upheld subject to consequential relief

LIGI BIJU KODDASARY,VAPI vs. ITO, WARD-5, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.727/Srt/2024 (Ay 2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Ligi Biju Koddasary Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, B-302, Sapphire Apartment, Vapi, 8Th Floor Fortune Square बनाम Raveshia Park, Murarji Circle, Ii, Above Tvz. Chala, Vs Gidc, Vapi-396 195 Vapi-396 191 [Pan : Anypk 5855 G] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

234D are unjustified. 9. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is unjustified.” 2. Rival submissions of the parties have been heard and record perused. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) of the assessee submits that assessee filed first appeal on 16.04.2022. Notice under section

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

234D of the Act is unjustified. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” ITA 1190/AHD/2017/AY.2012-13/249 & 248/SRT/2018/2013-14 & 2014-15 Shree Ganesh Khand Udhyog Sahakari Mandli 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society is running Cooperative Sugar Mill engaged in production of sugar and its bye-products

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

234D of the Act is unjustified. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” ITA 1190/AHD/2017/AY.2012-13/249 & 248/SRT/2018/2013-14 & 2014-15 Shree Ganesh Khand Udhyog Sahakari Mandli 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society is running Cooperative Sugar Mill engaged in production of sugar and its bye-products

SMT. MINAXIBEN HARSHADBHAI MAVANI,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Smt. Minaxiben Harshadbhai The Income Tax Officer, Mavani, Ward-1(3)(3), Surat. Vs. 204, Malhar Complex, Icchanath, Surat – 395 007. Pan: Agjpm 8034 B Applicant Respondent

234D of the Act is not justified. 7. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is individual, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 31.03.2014 declaring income o Rs.3,34,590/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. During

BAKIR PACHORIWALA,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, , VALSAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) Bakir Pachorwala, I.T.O., Raj Sheet Metal Engg. Works, C- Ward-1, Vs. 1/16-B, Gidc Estate, Pardi, Valsad. Valsad. Pan No. Adxpp 9237 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

234D of the Act is unjustified. 4. Initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is unjustified. 5. The order passed by the AO and confirmed by CIT(A) is illegal, invalid and bad in law and required to be quashed.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee

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

234D of the Act is unjustified. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 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

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

234D of the Act is unjustified. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 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

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

234D of the Act is unjustified. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 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

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, VADODARA vs. SHRI VINAYAK RATILAL MEHTA,, BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee and Revenue are allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.778 & 724/Srt/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Vinayak Ratilal Mehta Vs. The Income Tax Officer, A-2, Sundaram Society, Gnfc To Ward-1, Surat. Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch 392011 [Pan: Afqpm6438M The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Vinayak Ratilal Mehta A-2, Ward-1, Surat. Sundaram Society, Gnfc To Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch 392011 [Pan: Afqpm6438M अपीलाथ" / Assessee ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr. Dr

234D of the Act is unjustified. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified. The assessee craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 4. The appeal filed by assessee

SHRI VINAYAK RATILAL MEHTA,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee and Revenue are allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.778 & 724/Srt/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Vinayak Ratilal Mehta Vs. The Income Tax Officer, A-2, Sundaram Society, Gnfc To Ward-1, Surat. Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch 392011 [Pan: Afqpm6438M The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Vinayak Ratilal Mehta A-2, Ward-1, Surat. Sundaram Society, Gnfc To Zadeshwar Road, Bharuch 392011 [Pan: Afqpm6438M अपीलाथ" / Assessee ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.R. राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr. Dr

234D of the Act is unjustified. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified. The assessee craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 4. The appeal filed by assessee

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDALI LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2),, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

234D of the Act is unjustified. ITA 1243/AHD/2017/AY.2012-13/251 & 252/SRT/2018/2013-14 & 2014-15 Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand udyog mandala Ltd. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society is running Cooperative Sugar Mill engaged in production of sugar and its bye-products

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

234D of the Act is unjustified. ITA 1243/AHD/2017/AY.2012-13/251 & 252/SRT/2018/2013-14 & 2014-15 Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand udyog mandala Ltd. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society is running Cooperative Sugar Mill engaged in production of sugar and its bye-products

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

234D of the Act is unjustified. ITA 1243/AHD/2017/AY.2012-13/251 & 252/SRT/2018/2013-14 & 2014-15 Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand udyog mandala Ltd. 10. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is unjustified.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society is running Cooperative Sugar Mill engaged in production of sugar and its bye-products

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

In the result, the ground No

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

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