DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.-3, SURAT vs. SH. HARESHBHAI MOHANBHAI SAKARIYA, SURAT

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No.01/Srt/2021 (Ay 2010-11) It(Ss)A No.09/Srt/2020 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Dineshchandra D Income-Tax, Central Circle- Koradia, 3Room No.507, 5Th Floor, 9/10, Dayanand Society, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura B/H.Navyug College, Gate, Surat-395001 Rander Road, Surat Pan No: Acupk 3696 A Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee

68. Ground No. [iii] relates to deleting the addition of Rs.71,29,433/- on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 69. Brief facts for adjudication of this ground of appeal are that during the assessment, the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to assessee for disallowance for expenditure incurred for earning exempt income, which does

N.R. AGARWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VAPI vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,, SURAT

In the result the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

2 in assessee’s appeal for 2011-12 and 2012-13. The learned senior counsel for the assessee submits that the AO while passing assessment order under section 143(3) for both the years held that assessee has diverted interest bearing funds for earning exempt income and made disallowance under section 14A has been worked

THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. N.R. AGARWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VAPI

In the result the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) I.T.(Ss)A’S No.14,15,16/Ahd/2016, Ita’S No.1302,1303& 3032/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 09-10, 10-11; 2011-12,12-13& 2013-14 N.R.Agarwal Industries Ltd., Vs The Acit/Dcit, Circle-3, Plot No.169 To 169, Phase No.1, Surat. Gidc, Vapi. [Pan: Aaacn 7721 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

2 in assessee’s appeal for 2011-12 and 2012-13. The learned senior counsel for the assessee submits that the AO while passing assessment order under section 143(3) for both the years held that assessee has diverted interest bearing funds for earning exempt income and made disallowance under section 14A has been worked

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, BHARUCH vs. SHRI AMRUTLAL BABALDAS PATEL,, ANKLESHWAR

In the result, ground No. 2 of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Amrutlal Babaldas Patel, Income Tax, Circle-2, Vs I) A/96, Jalkamal Apartment, Bharuch. Near Manav Mandir, Gidc, Ankleshwar, Gujarat – 392002. Ii) 32, Surdhara Bunglow, Near Sai Hospital, Thaltej, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aebpp 2999 E Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee By Shri Jimit Shah – Ca Revenue By Shri Sita Ram Meena – Sr.Dr 22/02/2022 Date Of Hearing 12/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara Dated 29.04.2016 For The A.Y. 2012-13. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Development Expenses Of Rs.1,79,19,550/- Without Appreciating That The Purported Expenditure Was On Account Of Contractual Payment To Four Related Parties. 1.1 The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating That The Payment Of The Labour Expenses To The Contractors Were Held Up For Three Years Of Sale Of Land & Payment Was Made In The Calendar Year 2015 Only After The A.O. Sought Proof Of Payment. 1.2 The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That Contractors Of The Assessee Have Also Held Up Payment To Their Creditors For A Long Span Of Three Years, Which Is Not Acceptable On Any Surmise. Shri Amrutlal Babaldas Patel

section 14A be not made. In response to the show cause notice the assessee filed its reply and furnished its working under Rule 8D. The assessing officer worked out disallowance if interest expenses under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs. 6,22,025/- and disallowance of indirect 7 Shri Amrutlal Babaldas Patel expenses under Rule 8D(2

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)

section 14A of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Therefore, assessing officer has computed the disallowance as follows: ITA.274 & 307/SRT/2022/AYs.13-14 & 17-18 Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd. Sr.No Particulars Amounts (Rs) 1 Value of investment as on 31.03.2012 6,63,63,876 2 Value of investment as on 31.03.2013 6,63,63,876 3 Average value

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)

section 14A of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Therefore, assessing officer has computed the disallowance as follows: ITA.274 & 307/SRT/2022/AYs.13-14 & 17-18 Enviro Control Pvt. Ltd. Sr.No Particulars Amounts (Rs) 1 Value of investment as on 31.03.2012 6,63,63,876 2 Value of investment as on 31.03.2013 6,63,63,876 3 Average value

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LTD, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 14A of the Act at Rs. 13,32,300/- and MAT Credit entitlement of Rs. 6,36,89,244/-. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee was given substantial relief to the assessee. The addition made by the AO and on appeal deleting/restricting the various additions are summarized in the following chart: Sr. Nature Addition

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. M/S. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 14A of the Act at Rs. 13,32,300/- and MAT Credit entitlement of Rs. 6,36,89,244/-. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee was given substantial relief to the assessee. The addition made by the AO and on appeal deleting/restricting the various additions are summarized in the following chart: Sr. Nature Addition

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LTD, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 14A of the Act at Rs. 13,32,300/- and MAT Credit entitlement of Rs. 6,36,89,244/-. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee was given substantial relief to the assessee. The addition made by the AO and on appeal deleting/restricting the various additions are summarized in the following chart: Sr. Nature Addition

JUPAX DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 12(2), KOLKATA

In the result, ground of appeal raised by the assessee assessment order allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Jupax Distributors Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., Circle-4,Surat. 58A, Raja Basant Roy Road, (Old A.O.: Ito, Ward 12(2), Vs. Kolkata-700029. Kolkata (Wb) Pan No. Aaacj 6952 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

68 or disallowance under Section 14A was made. Thereby the explanation of assessee was accepted. The said order was further revised by the ld. Pr.CIT vide his order dated 14/03/2019 passed under Section 263 of the Act wherein it was held that the assessment order is erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of revenue

SMT NITUBEN PRADEEP DHINGRA,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-1, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

14A of the Act. 3. Later on, Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, [in short “the ld. PCIT”], has exercised his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961. On perusal of Scrutiny records, Ld PCIT noticed that assessee has shown an amount of Rs.29,90,030/- under the head "income from other sources" on account

SHANTAI EXIM LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, ITA.No.436/SRT/2018 of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

2. We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the cross appeals are decided as under. ITA.No.273/SRT/2018 : [Assessee’s Appeal] : 3. On Ground No.1, assessee challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.38.81 crores on account of unexplained purchases. The assessee company filed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, SURAT vs. SHANTAI EXIM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA.No.436/SRT/2018 of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

2. We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the cross appeals are decided as under. ITA.No.273/SRT/2018 : [Assessee’s Appeal] : 3. On Ground No.1, assessee challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.38.81 crores on account of unexplained purchases. The assessee company filed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VALSAD CIRCLE, VALSAD vs. M/S. MANGALDEEP, VALSAD

In the result, appeals in ITA No

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.699/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Valsad Circle, Vs. M/S. Mangaldeep, 1St Floor, Shankeshwar Complex, Valsad. Dhobiwad, Valsad, Valsad-396001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfm7130L (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.11/Srt/2021 [Arising In Ita No.699/Srt/2018] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) M/S. Mangaldeep, Vs. The Acit, Valsad Circle, 1St Floor, Shankeshwar Complex, Valsad. Dhobiwad, Valsad, Valsad-396001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfm7130L (Applicant-Co-Objector) (Respondent)

14A of the Act without considering the fact that the assessee has not incurred any expenses to earn dividend income from reliance Mutual Fund. He also erred in following his own order in assessee’s case for earlier year. 2. Ld. CIT(A), Valsad has erred in law and on fact to confirm Ao’s addition of Rs.27,467/- being

SHREE DURGA SYNTEX PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

68 of the Act. (iii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,40,038/- made on account of disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act despite the AO had satisfactorily established the applicability of provisions of section 14 r.w. Rule

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), SURAT vs. M/S. SHREE DURGA SYNTEX PVT. LTD, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

68 of the Act. (iii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,40,038/- made on account of disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act despite the AO had satisfactorily established the applicability of provisions of section 14 r.w. Rule

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, SURAT, SURAT vs. J.B. AND BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.522/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Vs. J. B. & Brothers Pvt. Ltd., Tower Fc 3011/3012, 3Rd Floor, Bharat Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Surat, Room Diamond Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, No.504, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400004 Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccj1569J (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 12/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2023

section 14A r.w.Rule 8D of the IT Rules had disallowed the amount of Rs.5,01,943/-. The working of the above disallowance given by the Assessing Officer as under: II A Financial Expenses 1,68,53,718/- B Average value of investment, 8,05,65,885/- 2

SACH ELECTRO MECH PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court)

14A, while passing assessment order 15.01.2016. The assessment order was revised ld. Pr.CIT by exercising his jurisdiction under section 263 dated 20.03.2018. Before passing, the revision order, the ld. Pr. CIT, on perusal of assessment record noted that assessee has shown the sales of services above ten lakh and have shown total revenue on account of rendering service

VIMALKUMAR VAJUBHAI KATRODIYA,SURAT vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1266/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Vimalkumar Vajubhai Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Katrodiya Income-Tax,Circle-2(2), Surat, Vs. 90, Mamta Park Society, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate- Spinning Mill Kapodara, 395 001 Varachha Road, Surat-395 006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aqipk 2458 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 17.10.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/ Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [in short, “NFAC/CIT(A)”] for assessment year (AY) 2016- 17, which in turn assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, “AO”) u/s 144 of the Act on 29.11.2018. 2