JAYESHKUMAR TULSIDAS SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Section 10(108) of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The employer had also deducted TDS on the said amount. No exemption

SUMAN NANDLAL RAVAL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

108). 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without granting reasonable opportunity of hearing and without issuing statutory notice under Section 250 of the Act during appellate proceedings. The order is thus vitiated for breach of natural justice and is bad in law. 3. The assessee was employed with Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), a Government

SUMAN NANDLAL RAVAL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

108). 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without granting reasonable opportunity of hearing and without issuing statutory notice under Section 250 of the Act during appellate proceedings. The order is thus vitiated for breach of natural justice and is bad in law. 3. The assessee was employed with Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), a Government

CHHAGANLAL BHIMABHAI DANGODARA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed…”

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble

108) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The compensation amount receipts in the hands of assessee as an employee of the BSNL, pursuant to the severance package, titled as BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2019 announced by the Department of Telecommunications(DoT), Central Government of India under total budgetary allocation approved by the Government is a special privilege/protection package granted

CHHAGANLAL BHIMABHAI DANGODARA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed…”

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble

108) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The compensation amount receipts in the hands of assessee as an employee of the BSNL, pursuant to the severance package, titled as BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme-2019 announced by the Department of Telecommunications(DoT), Central Government of India under total budgetary allocation approved by the Government is a special privilege/protection package granted

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS, making payment chargeable to tax under Section 195(1) of the IT Act and the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) has been rightly applied. Hence, the action of the A.O is correct and needs no interference.” 9. Perusal of the above would reveal that, broadly the reasons for confirming the disallowance of commission expenditure by the ld.CIT

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS, making payment chargeable to tax under Section 195(1) of the IT Act and the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) has been rightly applied. Hence, the action of the A.O is correct and needs no interference.” 9. Perusal of the above would reveal that, broadly the reasons for confirming the disallowance of commission expenditure by the ld.CIT

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS, making payment chargeable to tax under Section 195(1) of the IT Act and the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) has been rightly applied. Hence, the action of the A.O is correct and needs no interference.” 9. Perusal of the above would reveal that, broadly the reasons for confirming the disallowance of commission expenditure by the ld.CIT

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS, making payment chargeable to tax under Section 195(1) of the IT Act and the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) has been rightly applied. Hence, the action of the A.O is correct and needs no interference.” 9. Perusal of the above would reveal that, broadly the reasons for confirming the disallowance of commission expenditure by the ld.CIT

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 u/s 795 is not required when the assessee directly incurred travelling and hotel expenses on Foreign Technicians and the same were not reimbursed to the foreign parties or the foreign technicians. In the case of CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142 ITR 493 (CaL), the assessee company had paid its share of costs and expenses

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 u/s 795 is not required when the assessee directly incurred travelling and hotel expenses on Foreign Technicians and the same were not reimbursed to the foreign parties or the foreign technicians. In the case of CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142 ITR 493 (CaL), the assessee company had paid its share of costs and expenses

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 u/s 795 is not required when the assessee directly incurred travelling and hotel expenses on Foreign Technicians and the same were not reimbursed to the foreign parties or the foreign technicians. In the case of CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142 ITR 493 (CaL), the assessee company had paid its share of costs and expenses

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 u/s 795 is not required when the assessee directly incurred travelling and hotel expenses on Foreign Technicians and the same were not reimbursed to the foreign parties or the foreign technicians. In the case of CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142 ITR 493 (CaL), the assessee company had paid its share of costs and expenses

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 u/s 795 is not required when the assessee directly incurred travelling and hotel expenses on Foreign Technicians and the same were not reimbursed to the foreign parties or the foreign technicians. In the case of CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142 ITR 493 (CaL), the assessee company had paid its share of costs and expenses

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 80-IA of the Act. 69. The learned CIT (A) disregarded the contention of the assessee by observing that the impugned income does not have nexus with the distribution of power activity of the assessee. Thus the learned CIT (A) upheld the finding of the AO. 70. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

section 43D is a beneficial provision but the provision iS very clear when it states that " {a} in the case of a scheduled bank the income by way of interest in relation to such categories of bad and^dou^btful debts as may be prescribed having regard to the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India in relation

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT APOLLO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asssessee is partly allowed

TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. In view of the preceding discussion, it is clear that the appellant was not liable to deduct tax on the commission paid foreign agents. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 1, 89,56,768/- for AY 2010- 11 and Rs. 1,07,23,167/- for A Y 2011-12 under

GUJARAT APOLLO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asssessee is partly allowed

TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. In view of the preceding discussion, it is clear that the appellant was not liable to deduct tax on the commission paid foreign agents. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 1, 89,56,768/- for AY 2010- 11 and Rs. 1,07,23,167/- for A Y 2011-12 under

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT APOLLO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asssessee is partly allowed

TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. In view of the preceding discussion, it is clear that the appellant was not liable to deduct tax on the commission paid foreign agents. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 1, 89,56,768/- for AY 2010- 11 and Rs. 1,07,23,167/- for A Y 2011-12 under