THE AMROLI VIBHAG VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

j) of the IT Rules. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer with similar view. Before us Ld. AR of the assessee make two fold submission, number (i) the genuineness of expenses are not in doubt and number (ii) there was certain conditions printed condition on the back side of bills of transporter, wherein in case

THE AMROLI VIBHAG VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Saini

j) of the IT Rules. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer with similar view. Before us Ld. AR of the assessee make two fold submission, number (i) the genuineness of expenses are not in doubt and number (ii) there was certain conditions printed condition on the back side of bills of transporter, wherein in case

NYA INTERNATIONAL,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT

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.57/Srt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Nya International, Vs. The Pcit-1, Unit No.360, Plot No.239, Sez, Gidc Surat. Sachin, Suarat – 394230. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfn1681M

reassessment proceedings, there were two issues identified by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded by him which are as follows: (i) The credit entry in ING Vysya Bank Account No.5500111032480 to the tune of Rs.70,13,43,319/- and; (ii) Disallowance of deduction under section 10AA of the Act to the tune of Rs.87,21,44,414/-. ITA 57/SRT/2022/AY.2012-13

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.,2, SURAT vs. VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD, SURAT

In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं/It(Ss)A Nos.23 & 24/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 3, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Acit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Circle -1(2), Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 2, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं It(Ss)A Nos.90/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Dcit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Central Circle – 3, Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat. Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provision of section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer has duly recorded the satisfaction for issuing the notice u/s 153C of the Act. Further, it is not the contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has not recorded the satisfaction in the assessee's case

VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD,SURAT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.,-1(2), SURAT

In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं/It(Ss)A Nos.23 & 24/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 3, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Acit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Circle -1(2), Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 2, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं It(Ss)A Nos.90/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Dcit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Central Circle – 3, Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat. Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provision of section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer has duly recorded the satisfaction for issuing the notice u/s 153C of the Act. Further, it is not the contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has not recorded the satisfaction in the assessee's case

GAMANLAL NANUBHAI MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

MADHUBEN DILIPBHAI MODI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

ANILKUMAR GAMANLAL MODI, HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

NITIN KUMAR GAMANLAL MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

JIGNESHKUMAR S. MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

VIJAYKUMAR GAMANLAL MODI, HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

SANMUKHLAL NANUBHAI MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

NIKUNJKUMAR D. MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

J. Parekh (CA) Revenue by : Shri B.P.K. Panda (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 10/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are eight appeals filed by the respective assessees against the individual orders of ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Since the common issues are involved, all these appeals were heard

SHRIFAL IMPEX PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

27. Nakoda Exim Pvt. Ltd No reply received 28. Bhavya Gems No reply received 29. Anmol Diamonds No reply received 30. Akshit Intpex Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 31. Aadishwar Diamond Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 7. Further, during the course of assessment proceedings spot inquiry was conducted through inspector regarding business activities of the assessee company. In his report

SHRIFAL IMPEX PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

27. Nakoda Exim Pvt. Ltd No reply received 28. Bhavya Gems No reply received 29. Anmol Diamonds No reply received 30. Akshit Intpex Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 31. Aadishwar Diamond Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 7. Further, during the course of assessment proceedings spot inquiry was conducted through inspector regarding business activities of the assessee company. In his report

SHRIFAL IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 To 191/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12 To 2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) Shrifal Impex Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, No.504, 5Th Floor, H. No.6/B/1739- Ward-2(1)(3), 1380, Parshwa Complex Thoba Sheri, Surat Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaocs4409E (Appellant) (Respondent)

27. Nakoda Exim Pvt. Ltd No reply received 28. Bhavya Gems No reply received 29. Anmol Diamonds No reply received 30. Akshit Intpex Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 31. Aadishwar Diamond Pvt. Ltd. No reply received 7. Further, during the course of assessment proceedings spot inquiry was conducted through inspector regarding business activities of the assessee company. In his report

RAVI MEEMROT, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. MEHUL VINUBHAI RADADIYA, SURAT

In the result, addition u/s 69A is set aside to the file of AO and addition of income from house property as business income is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.966/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 (Hybrid Hearing) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Mehul Vinubhai Radadiya बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, 101, Mangal Deep Apartment, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Kapodara Road, Om Nagar, Parvat Surat-395 001 Patia, Surat-395 010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajgpr 7928 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.970/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Ankit Bholabhai Radadiya बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, Plot No.07, Adarsh Society, Nr. Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Gokulam Diary, Athwalines, Surat- Surat-395 001 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aztpr 2029 N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.971/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Parshottambhai Bachubhai बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, Radadiya Vs. Room No.508, Aaykar 41/42 Om Nagar Society, Nr Puna Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Octroi Naka Parvat Patiya, Surat- 395 001 395 010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpr 3605 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.973/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Rahulkumar Vinubhai बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat Radadiya Vs. Room No.508, Aaykar 45, Saifee Co-Op. Housing Society

section 292C of the Act is also available against the assessee. The Ld. AR further stated that the two other images, as reproduced in para 9.2 and 9.3 of the assessment order, relied upon by the AO do not contain the name or signature of the assessee but contains the name of some unrelated persons. Moreover, the copies

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. VIPULKUMAR MANUBHAI RADADIYA, SURAT

In the result, addition u/s 69A is set aside to the file of AO and addition of income from house property as business income is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.966/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 (Hybrid Hearing) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Mehul Vinubhai Radadiya बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, 101, Mangal Deep Apartment, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Kapodara Road, Om Nagar, Parvat Surat-395 001 Patia, Surat-395 010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ajgpr 7928 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.970/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Ankit Bholabhai Radadiya बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, Plot No.07, Adarsh Society, Nr. Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Gokulam Diary, Athwalines, Surat- Surat-395 001 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aztpr 2029 N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.971/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Parshottambhai Bachubhai बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat, Radadiya Vs. Room No.508, Aaykar 41/42 Om Nagar Society, Nr Puna Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Octroi Naka Parvat Patiya, Surat- 395 001 395 010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpr 3605 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.973/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Rahulkumar Vinubhai बनाम/ Tax, Central Circle – 4, Surat Radadiya Vs. Room No.508, Aaykar 45, Saifee Co-Op. Housing Society

section 292C of the Act is also available against the assessee. The Ld. AR further stated that the two other images, as reproduced in para 9.2 and 9.3 of the assessment order, relied upon by the AO do not contain the name or signature of the assessee but contains the name of some unrelated persons. Moreover, the copies