HARMONY YARNS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.348/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Harmony Yarns Private Vs. The Pcit-1, Limited, Surat Plot-65, 1St Floor Subhash Nagar Society, Ghod Dod Road, Nr. Ram Chowk, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach5895F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Airiju Jaikaran, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/10/2023 23/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

68 of the Act and to be added to the total income of the assessee, for the year under consideration, which the assessing officer has failed to do. 4. It was also noticed by ld. PCIT from the Form 3CB-Col. 20(b) that the PF contribution received from employees of Rs.14,796/-, for which due date for payment

M/S. MITSU PRIVATE LIMITED,,VAPI vs. THE ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

va) from assessment year 2003-04 and not for assessment year under appeal, therefore, the non- compete fees in question amounts to receipt of cap in nature, not chargeable to tax for assessment year under consideration. Therefore, respectfully following the above judgements of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and Hon`ble Supreme Court as cited above, we allow Ground

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. MITSU LIMITED,, DAMAN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

va) from assessment year 2003-04 and not for assessment year under appeal, therefore, the non- compete fees in question amounts to receipt of cap in nature, not chargeable to tax for assessment year under consideration. Therefore, respectfully following the above judgements of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and Hon`ble Supreme Court as cited above, we allow Ground

CONDOR FOOTWEAR (INDIA) LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE PCIT, SURAT-1, SURAT, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.336/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Condor Footwear (India) Limited, Vs. The Pcit – 1, Plot No. A-5/3, Road No.10, Main Surat Gate No.2, Hojiwala Industrial Esta, Vanz, Surat, B.O. - 394230 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacc9540N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/01/2025

section 263 and discussed about the interpretation of the expression “erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of revenue” and given a finding that though registration granted to Shri Arvindo Institute of Applied Scientific Research Trust has been cancelled to w.e.f. 01.10.2004, the AO has allowed deduction u/s 80G without verification of facts on record

BINAY RAMBAHAL SINGH,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(6), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1099/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Binay Rambahal Singh Income Tax Officer, 112, Sankaip Row House Society Ward-2(3)(6), Surat, Aayakar बनाम Ugat Canal Road, Jahangira Bag. Bhavan, Majura Gate, Vs Near Prabhudarshan Society, Surat-395 001 Surat-394 130 [Pan : Azyps 7939 M] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

68,56,024 85,11,726 3. The Ld. AR of the assessee also submitted that constitutional validity of provisions of Section 36(1)(va

M/S. SHREE PADMAVATI ENGINEERS (I) PVT.LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH RANGE,, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Meena

68,218. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A). Wherein it was submitted that small disallowance were deleted by the CIT(A) in A.Y. 2010-11. However, this contention was not accepted by the CIT(A) on the ground that in A.Y. 10-11, the CIT (A) deleted disallowance of interest as the assessee

AKLAVYA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.93/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Physical Hearing) Aklavya Industries Private Limited, Vs. The Ito, Ward1(1)(1), Plot No.2429, Road No. 24, Surat. Opp: Parle Bottling Plant, Gidc, Sachin, Surat - 394230 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagcs6274F

section 14B of the EPF Act. Therefore, for any delay in payment of any contributions or administrative charges due for any period during the lockdown, no proceeding should be initiated for levy of penal damages in such cases.” The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 10/01/2022 (Copy enclosed at page no. 57 of PB) had stated – “In March

SHALU DYEING PTG MILLS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shalu Dyeing Ptg Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, 262 G.I.D.C Industrial Estate, Pandesara, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat – 394221. Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcs8213P Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 15/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x). 4. It is therefore prayed that addition made by assessing officer and confirmed by CIT (A) may please be deleted. 5. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. First, we shall take ground nos. 1

KISHOR RAMESHBHAI MEHTA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.60/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Kishor Rameshbhai Mehta Vs. Ito, Prop. Of Aditya Infrastructure, Ward - 1(5), 139, Maher Nagar, Opp. Baps Bharuch Hospital, Adajan Gam Circle, Surat - 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adepm 4458 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’), dated 02.08.2024 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2013-14. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case