PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

TDS, and late payment of taxes aggregating to Rs. 34,56,637/-, which were directly related to specific assets or statutory liabilities and had no nexus with earning exempt income. The CIT(A) accepted this contention and directed that such interest should be excluded from the computation under Rule 8D(2)(ii). On re-computation, the interest disallowance under Rule

JAP AGRO FOODS PVT.LTD.,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(4),, BARODA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 191/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 M/S Jap Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, Block No.295, Vs. Ward-1(4), Ranu Tal. Padra, Baroda. Vadodara.

addition of receipt of Rs. 9,929/- only from Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. 28. The AO during the assessment proceeding from ADR report observed that Madhya Gujarat Vij Co Ltd. during the year under consoderationhas paid a sum of Rs. 9,929 and also deduted TDS of Rs. 993 on the same to the assessee. But the assessee

ITO, WARD-1, PALANPUR, PALANPUR vs. GELOT AGRI EXPORTS, PALANPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

additions were made to its income on account of disallowances of expenses on which the assessee had failed to deduct TDS

GELOT AGRI EXPORTS,DEESA vs. ITO WD 1 PALANPUR, BANASKANTHA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

additions were made to its income on account of disallowances of expenses on which the assessee had failed to deduct TDS

CHIRAG MAHENDRABHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

TDS amount of Rs. 2,96,734/- was not duly given credit by the CPC Centre. Aggrieved by this intimation order the assessee filed an rectification application under Section 154 on 03.07.2015 to the jurisdictional AO namely ITO, Ward-4(2)(1) and also e-filed rectification to the CPC Centre Bangalore. The assessee also claimed that the CPC Centre

LYSA TRADING LLP,AHMEDABAD,GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2022-23 Lysa Trading Llp Ito, Ward-1(2)(3) Corporate House-2, Shilp Vs Ahmedabad. Corporate Park Rajpath Rangoli Road Bodakdev Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaifl 3030 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

addition of Rs.17,08,908/- to the income returned by the assessee from house property on account of shortfall in the rental income shown as per the schedule TDS

TRANSWIND COMMUNICATION ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

addition made on account of alleged omitted income of Rs. 12,52,978/-. 4.1 During the course of the assessment proceedings, your Honor has asked to reconcile the claim of TDS

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS certificate, he worked out a sum of Rs.3,17,294/-. This income was not included by the assessee, hence when it was confronted by the AO vide order sheet entry dated 24.12.2009, the assessee has admitted this income and agreed for addition

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS certificate, he worked out a sum of Rs.3,17,294/-. This income was not included by the assessee, hence when it was confronted by the AO vide order sheet entry dated 24.12.2009, the assessee has admitted this income and agreed for addition

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD),RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS certificate, he worked out a sum of Rs.3,17,294/-. This income was not included by the assessee, hence when it was confronted by the AO vide order sheet entry dated 24.12.2009, the assessee has admitted this income and agreed for addition

THE ACIT,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS certificate, he worked out a sum of Rs.3,17,294/-. This income was not included by the assessee, hence when it was confronted by the AO vide order sheet entry dated 24.12.2009, the assessee has admitted this income and agreed for addition

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS certificate, he worked out a sum of Rs.3,17,294/-. This income was not included by the assessee, hence when it was confronted by the AO vide order sheet entry dated 24.12.2009, the assessee has admitted this income and agreed for addition

ARVINDKUMAR AMULKH TANNA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (3), AHMEADABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

TDS deductions, and accepted income returns, the transactions were still suspicious. - The AO's unsatisfaction was based on thorough investigations and not arbitrary. - The AO's findings justified invoking Section 68/69A of the Income Tax Act, leading to the conclusion that the loans were not genuine. IT(ss)A Nos.2/Ahd/2021 to 7/Ahd/2021 (by Revenue) IT(ss)A No.66/Ahd/2020 & ITA No.577/Ahd/2020

AMAN MAZHERALI SAIYED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

TDS Rs.67240 on said salary income has already been deducted and paid by employer. Therefore salary income was fully offered to tax and no addition

SANKALP RECREATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

income of the assessee. The DR’s submissions, while highlighting procedural violations, do not justify taxing the gross receipts without considering the expenses involved in generating such receipts. Once profit is estimated, no further additions can be made for procedural violations like cash payment limits or TDS

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP RECREATION PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

income of the assessee. The DR’s submissions, while highlighting procedural violations, do not justify taxing the gross receipts without considering the expenses involved in generating such receipts. Once profit is estimated, no further additions can be made for procedural violations like cash payment limits or TDS

TESTEC ASIA LIMITED,UNITED ARAB EMIRATES vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VADODARA, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.44/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2022-23 Testec Asia Limited The Dy.Director Of Income Tax बनाम/ United Arab Emirates Circle, International Taxation V/S. P.O. Box No.16799, Dubai, Vadodara- 390 007 United Arab Emirates – 999999 (Or) Villa 11, Street 5, Medows 1, Emirates Hill, United Arab Emirates – Not Listed 999999 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aajct 4035 A (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Virat Bhavsar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Income Tax Rules, 1962, and had failed to take sufficient actions to ensure the transfer of TDS credit. The CIT(A) decided against the assessee, stating that the necessary steps were not taken as required by the rules. The additional

SHIVA PHARMACHEM LIMITED,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2021-22 Shiva Pharmachem Limited The Dy.Cit Shiva 12Th Floor, Vs Circle-2(1)91) Opp. Tricolour Hospital Vadodara Genda Circle, Vadodara-390 023 (Gujarat) Pan: Aajcs 3940 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre – Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”] Passed On 24/07/2023 U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Instituted Against The Order Dated 19/12/2022 Passed By The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22. Facts Of The Case: Shiva Pharmachem Liimited Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year 2021-22:

addition made by the CPC, Income Tax department on account of not granting credit of TDS/TCS amounting to Rs. 10,09,254/-. Shiva Pharmachem Liimited vs. The DCIT Asst. Year 2021-22: ii) For the year, the appellant Company M/s Shiva Pharmachem Limited entered into schemes of arrangement under section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act 2013 with