MADANGOPAL RAMKUMAR SIKAWAT,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT., SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Madangopal Ramkumar Sikawat, Ito, Ward 1(2)(1), 11-1572, Radhakrishna Textile Aayakar Bhavan, Majuragate, Market, Ring Road, Vs. Surat-395007. Surat-395002. Pan No. Awgps 7288 G Appellant Respondent

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for Rs 9,55,042/-, also the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same. ITA No. 918/SRT/2025 2 Madangopal Madangopal Ramkumar Sikawat 2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are Briefly stated

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs. ANTRIX DIAMOND EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, these three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.176 To 178/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-3, Vs. Antrix Diamond Exports Pvt. Ltd., Surat. 1006, Free Press Mark, Raheja Centre Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaca3403G (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Ms Ekta Sanghvi, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2023 21/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

90,00,752 TNMM Anaya Gems Inc. Purchase of Polished Diamonds 75,91,05,311 TNMM Total 261,81,06,063 The assessee has applied TNMM to benchmark the above transactions. During the course of the TP proceedings, the assessee justified the TNMM by comparing its profits margins with the margins earned by third parties engaged in similar activities. However

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs. ANTRIX DIAMOND EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, these three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.176 To 178/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-3, Vs. Antrix Diamond Exports Pvt. Ltd., Surat. 1006, Free Press Mark, Raheja Centre Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaca3403G (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Ms Ekta Sanghvi, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2023 21/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

90,00,752 TNMM Anaya Gems Inc. Purchase of Polished Diamonds 75,91,05,311 TNMM Total 261,81,06,063 The assessee has applied TNMM to benchmark the above transactions. During the course of the TP proceedings, the assessee justified the TNMM by comparing its profits margins with the margins earned by third parties engaged in similar activities. However

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs. ANTRIX DIAMOND EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, these three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.176 To 178/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-3, Vs. Antrix Diamond Exports Pvt. Ltd., Surat. 1006, Free Press Mark, Raheja Centre Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaca3403G (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Ms Ekta Sanghvi, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2023 21/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

90,00,752 TNMM Anaya Gems Inc. Purchase of Polished Diamonds 75,91,05,311 TNMM Total 261,81,06,063 The assessee has applied TNMM to benchmark the above transactions. During the course of the TP proceedings, the assessee justified the TNMM by comparing its profits margins with the margins earned by third parties engaged in similar activities. However

SADIK DAUDBHAI NANDOLIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

penalty proceedings as initiated u/s 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c) & 271Fof the Act being unlawful and devoid of any merit kindly be quashed. Sadik Daudbhai Nandoliya vs. ITO Asst. Year –2012-13 - 3– 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in charging interest u/s 234A

SHARDABEN DHANJIBHAI SAVANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(4), SURAT

In the result, the ground of appeal raised in this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 385 To 387/Srt/2025 (Ay 2021-22) (Physical Hearing) Shardaben Dhanjibihai Savani Assessment Unit Income-Tax 74-75, 3Rd Floor Om Industries-8, Department Jurisdictional Ao/ Umbhel Road, Parabgam, Kamrej, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ Surat-394 101 Ward-2(3)(4) Surat, Aaykar Vs [Pan : Kiyps 3244 C] Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395 001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

section 144 r.w.s 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on 17.12.2022. ITA Nos.385-387/SRT/2025 (A.Y.21-22) Sharadaben D Savani 2. All the three appeals are interconnected, and relate to one assessee, for same AY i.e., 2021-22, therefore with the consent of parties, these appeals have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed, to avoid

KHILAN N. PATEL (HUF),SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.429/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Khilan N. Patel (Huf), Vs. The Dcit, 6/2201, Nagarsheri, Mahidharpura, Circle – 2(3), Surat – 395003 (Gujarat) Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aakhk6987L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Akshay M. Modi, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 12.02.2024 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SHARDABEN DHANJIBHAI SAVANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(4), SURAT

section 144 r.w.s 144B of\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on 17.12.2022.\nITA Nos.385-387/SRT/2025 (A.Y.21-22)\nSharadaben D Savani\n2. All the three appeals are interconnected, and relate to one assessee, for same\nAY i.e., 2021-22, therefore with the consent of parties, these appeals have been\nclubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed, to avoid

SHARDABEN DHANJIBHAI SAVANI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(4), SURAT

section 144 r.w.s 144B of\nIncome-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on 17.12.2022.\nITA Nos.385-387/SRT/2025 (A.Y.21-22)\nSharadaben D Savani\n2.\nAll the three appeals are interconnected, and relate to one assessee, for same\nAY i.e., 2021-22, therefore with the consent of parties, these appeals have been\nclubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed, to avoid

RAJENDRAPRASAD BABULAL KHETAN,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. - 4, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.142/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Rajendraprasad Babulal Khetan, Vs. The Acit, E-2-1101, Capital Greens, Vesu Central Circle-4, – Bharthana, Surat – 395007. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk8161R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील (खोज और ज"ती) सं./It(Ss)A Nos.32/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rajendraprasad Babulal Khetan, Vs. The Acit, E-2-1101, Capital Greens, Vesu Central Circle-4, – Bharthana, Surat – 395007. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk8161R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act are initiated on this issue for concealment of income.” 6. In view of the above aforesaid factual and legal discussion and respectfully following the decision of Madras High Court in Kumararani Meenakshi Achi (supra) and decision of Co-ordinate Bench in Prabhodhchandra Ambelal Desai (supra), the revenue cannot treat the assessee

MOHAMMED ANIS GULAM MOHAMMED MEMON,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(7), SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.227/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Mohammed Anis Gulam Mohammed Vs. The Ito, Memon, Ward – 1(3)(7), 48, Memon Nagar Society, Nr. Surat Bharucha Apartment, Khandakuwa, Rander, Surat - 395005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aljpm3607K (Appellant) (Respondent)

90,090/- on 25.03.2016. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny in CASS and accordingly notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 29.07.2016 and served upon the assessee through speed post. Further, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, was issued on 29.07.2016 and served upon the assesse along-with notice u/s

JAYANTIBHAI CHIMANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Diesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

section (u/s.) 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ~ 1 ~ Jayantibhai Chimanbhai patel, Surat 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are as follows: 1. Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on fact to upheld AO's reopening of assessment U/s. 148A ignoring the law that proceedings U/s. 148A are not in accordance with

DESH BHUSHAN SINGHAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), SURAT

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.862/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Desh Bhushan Singhal, Vs. Income Tax Officer G-12, Rittz Square, Nr. Indoor Ward-1(3)(1), Stadium, Ghod Dod Road, Surat - Surat 395 007, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acips3627H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘in short, the Act’) dated 15.07.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short “the CIT(A)”] for the assessment year (AY) 2014-15. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for the appeals are as under: “(1) That on the facts

NIKUNJKUMAR GHANSHYAMBHAI DESAI,DESAI STREET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SECOND FLOOR

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Nikunjkumar Ghanshyambhai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Panetha Desai Street Paneth, Zaghadia, Ward – 1(4), Bharuch – 393120, Gujarat Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amgpd2814B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Piyush Panchal, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 18.12.2023 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “(i) In fact and in law the assessment

MRS. DIXABEN JAYESHBHAI PATEL,VAPI vs. ITO, WARD-2, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.228 & 229/Srt/2020 Assessment Years: (2011-12 & 2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Dixaben Jayeshbhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2, Plot No.42, Krishna Colony, Vapi. Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi, Gujarat – 396191. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahspp3273F (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/02/2023 10/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

90,849/- and should have deleted the huge addition of Rs.19,86,653/- made by AO. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A), Valsad has erred in partly upholding the addition of Rs.4,95,913/- out of total addition of Rs.19,86,653/- made

MRS. DAXABEN JAYESHBHAIPATEL,VAPI vs. ITO, WARD-2, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.228 & 229/Srt/2020 Assessment Years: (2011-12 & 2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Dixaben Jayeshbhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2, Plot No.42, Krishna Colony, Vapi. Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi, Gujarat – 396191. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahspp3273F (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/02/2023 10/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

90,849/- and should have deleted the huge addition of Rs.19,86,653/- made by AO. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A), Valsad has erred in partly upholding the addition of Rs.4,95,913/- out of total addition of Rs.19,86,653/- made

SHRI NEHRUNAGAR CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(5), SURAT

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

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.507/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Hearing) Shri Nehrunagar Co.Op. Housing Vs. The Ito, Society, Ward – 1(3)(5), Umang Hall, Nehrunagar Society, Surat Ichchanath Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabas2271H (Appellant) (Respondent)

90 TTJ 184) along with Shree Yogeshwarnagar Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. V ACIT Circle-9 Abd in ITA No.2129/Ahd/2005 dated 11-09-2009. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing

SHRI FARSURAM RATILAL BHAMWALA,,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Cit(A) After Considering The Case Of Both The Parties Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee.

penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 271(l)(c) of the Act.” Ground No. 1 4. This ground raised by the assessee relates to challenging the order of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of ITO in making additions of Rs. 5,36,556/- u/s. 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Ld. A.R. appearing on behalf