SEJAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.435/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V Ug-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, S. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqcs 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

250 27,78,67,477 70,00,000 2.52 % Private Limited Substantial 4,07,00,100 3,45,009 33,34,19,162 50,00,000 1.50 % Consultancy Private Limited ITA No.435/AHD/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Founder Properties 7,34,69,858 71,020 30,22,62,508 75,00,000 2.48 % Seva Infrastructure 4

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT vs. VALENCIA CORPORATION, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) A.C.I.T. M/S Valencia Corporation, Central Circle-4, S. No. 400, T.P. No. 29 (Vesu-Rundh Vs. Surat. Magdalla), F.P. No. 45/2, Nr. Siddhivinayak Temple, Vesu, Surat (Gujarat) Pan : Aakfv 2329 K Appellant Respondednt C.O. No. 17/Srt/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 257/Srt/2022)(Ay: 2016-17) M/S Valencia Corporation, A.C.I.T. S. No. 400, T.P. No. 29 (Vesu- Central Circle-4, Vs. Rundh Magdalla), F.P. No. 45/2, Surat. Nr. Siddhivinayak Temple, Vesu, Surat (Gujarat) Pan : Aakfv 2329 K Appellant/Objector Respondednt

250(5). 4. In addition and alternative to cross objection No. 1, 2, & 3, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly appreciated the facts that entire amount of Rs. 2,56,70,912/- pertains to works contractor(i.e. Konark Infratech) and TDS was deducted in concern

HITENDRASINH CHANDRASINH BAKROLA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

250/-. The assessee filed reply and after taking cognizance of the said reply, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 13,60,500/- in respect of unexplained cash deposit being unexplained income u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs. 62,97,975/- as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68

BALA FILLING STATION,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shripawan Singh& Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.822/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybridhearing) Bala Filling Station Vs. The Acit, Opp. Geb Substation, Jambusar Circle - 1, Road,Jambusar - 392150, Gujarat Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagfb8418F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, reconstitution fees capitalized and interest income respectively. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant raised grounds on the first three additions. The CIT(A) deleted the additions of Rs.10,47,927/- and Rs.3,75,000/-. However, he dismissed

KRUNALBHAI ASHOKBHAI GANDHI,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 3(2)(1), SURAT, SURAT

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands\ndismissed

68 or section 69A of\nthe Act is on the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has\nfurther held that explanation offered by the assessee should\nbe carefully examined by the AO to ascertain whether all the\ningredients of the onus are proved by the assessee or not. The\nassessee is required to discharge the onus by producing\nevidence

M/S. PATEL MADHAVLAL MAGANLAL & CO.,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No. 48 & 50/Srt/2022 (Ay: 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Physical Court) Assistant Commissioner M/S Patel Madhavlal Maganlal & Co., Of Income Tax, 3/139, Parsi Sheri Navapura, Vs. Central Circle-2, Surat-395003. Surat. Pan: Aadfp 2740 F Appellant Respondednt

68 of the Act, the addition is unlawful and may be deleted. 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee noted that in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has not considered (dealt upon) the submission made by assessee regarding source of cash found at Mumbai Central Railway station. The assessee claimed that the cash found belonged

DY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2, SURAT vs. M/S. PATEL MADHAVLAL MAGANLAL & CO., SURAT

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiit(Ss)A No. 48 & 50/Srt/2022 (Ay: 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Physical Court) Assistant Commissioner M/S Patel Madhavlal Maganlal & Co., Of Income Tax, 3/139, Parsi Sheri Navapura, Vs. Central Circle-2, Surat-395003. Surat. Pan: Aadfp 2740 F Appellant Respondednt

68 of the Act, the addition is unlawful and may be deleted. 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee noted that in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has not considered (dealt upon) the submission made by assessee regarding source of cash found at Mumbai Central Railway station. The assessee claimed that the cash found belonged

KAVISH FOCUS PIPES PVT LTD (NOW KNOWN AS GSPL SEAMLESS PIPES PVT. LTD),SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.48 & 09/Srt/2020 (Ays 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Kaviish Focus Pipes Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer (Now Known As Gspl Seamless Ward-1(1)(3), Surat, 1St Floor, Vs Pipes Pvt. Ltd.) Survey No.389 Room No.113, Aaykar Bhawan, Orma, Taluika Olpad, Surat-394 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 540 [Pan Aaeck 0608 B] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

68 of the Act. The assessing officer passed assessment order under section 144 on 25.02.2015. ITA Nos.48 & 09/SRT/2020 (A.Ys.12-13 & 13-14) GSPL Seamless Pipes Pvt.Ltd 3. Aggrieved by the additions made in assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Before CIT(A) the assessee filed detailed written submission as recorded in para

KAVIISH FOCUS PIPES PVT. LTD,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.48 & 09/Srt/2020 (Ays 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Kaviish Focus Pipes Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer (Now Known As Gspl Seamless Ward-1(1)(3), Surat, 1St Floor, Vs Pipes Pvt. Ltd.) Survey No.389 Room No.113, Aaykar Bhawan, Orma, Taluika Olpad, Surat-394 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 540 [Pan Aaeck 0608 B] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

68 of the Act. The assessing officer passed assessment order under section 144 on 25.02.2015. ITA Nos.48 & 09/SRT/2020 (A.Ys.12-13 & 13-14) GSPL Seamless Pipes Pvt.Ltd 3. Aggrieved by the additions made in assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Before CIT(A) the assessee filed detailed written submission as recorded in para

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 111, SURAT vs. MUKESH ARJANBHAI MANIYA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.105/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 (Hybrid Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Mukesh Arjanbhai Maniya बनाम/ Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(1), C-303, Afil Tower, L.H. Road, Vs. Surat, Room No.108, 1St Varachha, Surat-395 006 Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afepm 7227 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/11/2025

68 of the Act w.r.t. unsecured loans. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has violated the principles of natural justice while admitting the additional evidences and not providing opportunity of being heard to the AO as per the provisions of section 250

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3) SURAT vs. MEGA COLLECTIONS PVT LTD, SURAT

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.311/Srt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Ward-1(1)(3), Vs. Mega Collections Pvt. Ltd., Surat. 38-39, Kamla Estate, Gitanjali Petrol Pump, Varachha Road, Surat – 395009. (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagcm3809C

68 of the Act for unexplained Share capital + Share Premium and unsecured loan as the decision of the Hon'ble 1TAT, Surat in assessee's own case on similar issue for the A.Y 2012-13 has not been accepted by the department and further appeal have been filed before the Hon'ble High Court where decision is pending

HEMANT NARESH AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. 4, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”), dated 06.01.2023 and 05.01.2023 by the IT(SS)A No.68, 70 & ITA. No.170/Srt/2023 A.Ys 15-16, 18-19 & 20-21 Sh. Hemant N. Agarwal Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [in short, “CIT(A)”] for the Assessment Years (AY) 2015-16, 2018-19 and 2020-21, which

RAMESHKUMAR KARSANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(5), SURAT

Accordingly the estimated addition made of Rs.35,166/-[0.5% of 70,33,182/-] by the AC invoking provision of section 69C of the I.T Act stand deleted. Thus this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for short) for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- “1. Ld. CIT(A), NFAC. Delhi has erred in law and on fact to upheld AO's disallowance

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, SURAT vs. SHRI MUKESH NANUBHAI DESAI,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of 16

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.1557/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Mukesh Nanubhai Desai, Income Tax, 01, Shri Darshan Society, Circle-1(1)(1), Jamuna Nagar Bus Stand, Surat. Ghod Road, Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aatpd 0728 R] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Cross Objection No.121/Ahd/20126 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Mukesh Nanubhai Desai, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 01, Shri Darshan Society, Tax, Jamuna Nagar Bus Stand, Circle-1(1)(1), Surat. Ghod Road, Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aatpd 0728 R] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri. O. P. Singh – Ld. Cit-Dr. सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 01.05.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 31.05.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection By The 1. Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Appeals)-Ii; Surat (In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 21.03.2016 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are Read As Under : 2. “[1] On Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.22,77,84,000/- Merely On Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Surat Vs. Mukesh Nanubhai Desai /Ita No.1557/Ahd/2016 : A.Y.2011-12 Page 2 Of 17

250(4) of the Act and furnish remand report on the issue. Since the AO has failed to provide any report in spite of a very good period of time, the CIT (A) has decided the appeal on the material available on record. On perusal of details filed during the course of appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) observed that

MAHENDRA DALPATBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BARDOLI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Mahendra Dalpatbhai Patel, I.T.O., 183, Patel Faliyu Limodra Village, Ward-1, Vs. Mangrol, Surat-394110. Bardoli. Pan No. Axlpp 1949 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

68 on account of unexplained cash credit. The case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information at ITS data about depositing/cash credit in his bank account. Even before ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not furnish such details. The ld. CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order without discussing the merit of the case

PARESHBHAI NATVARLAL SHAH,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAVSARI

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

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1007/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 (Hybrid Hearing) Pareshbhai Natvarlal Shah Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, बनाम/ 6-B, Sainath Society, Moroli Navsari-396 445 Vs. Bazar, Navsari-396 436 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adfps 0044 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Prakash Patel, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 13/11/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 10.01.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/ Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act dated

DEVNGI JEWELLWERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Mmber आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Devngi Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, 109 -110, Shreyas Diamond Centre, Circle – 1(1)(1), Mini Bazar, Varachha Road, Surat Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcd3227A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

250(4) of the Act, which was not satisfactorily explained. The impossibility of conduct by the assessee has not been satisfactorily explained. The VAT return does not put fetters on the AO to make addition, if the conditions of section 68

ITEC MEASURES PRIVATE LIMITED,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1250/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Itec Measures Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Ito, Plot No.397-398, Silvassa Road, Ward - 3, Gidc, Gujarat - 396195 Vapi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcp8921K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Khushbu Bagrecha, Ca Respondent By Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/06/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 12.11.2024 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “The Ld. AO has not considered various proof regarding source

TEJAS ARVINDKUMAR DESAI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(3), SURAT

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Tejas Arvindkumar Desai Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 202/302, Guru Pushya Ward-1(3)(3), Surat, Income Tax Vs. Apartment, Maskati Plot, Officer, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Parle Point, Surat-395 007 Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipn 4702 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 21.12.2023 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short