XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS certificates as under: 203. (1) Every person deducting tax in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter shall, within such period as may be prescribed from the time of credit or payment of the sum, or, as the case may be, from the time of issue of a cheque or warrant for payment of any dividend

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS certificates as under: 203. (1) Every person deducting tax in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter shall, within such period as may be prescribed from the time of credit or payment of the sum, or, as the case may be, from the time of issue of a cheque or warrant for payment of any dividend

M/S. BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals being IT(SS)A No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer determined total book profit of Rs. 2,73,28,938/-. In the same assessment year, disallowances was made on account of late payment of provident fund at Rs. 624/-. The addition was also made on account of no TDS on payment of commission at Rs. 29,110/-. The Assessing

INCOME TAX OFFICERS (TDS),, GANDHINAGAR vs. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2266/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct any sum in accordance with the provisions of this Act; or (b) referred to in sub-section (IA) of section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part

STATE BANK OF INDIA BHAVNAGAR PARA BRANCH,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO TDS WARD 1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS under section 192 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that certain employees had undertaken journeys involving a foreign leg and the assessee had not deducted tax at source on such payments. Accordingly, notices were issued to the assessee asking it to explain as to why it should not be treated

STATE BANK OF INDIA BHAVNAGAR PARA BRANCH,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO TDS WARD 1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS under section 192 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that certain employees had undertaken journeys involving a foreign leg and the assessee had not deducted tax at source on such payments. Accordingly, notices were issued to the assessee asking it to explain as to why it should not be treated

STHAPATI ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIORS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2361/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Sthapati Architecture & Dcit, बनाम/ Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 8, Vs. 502, New York Plaza, Ahmedabad. Opp. Judges Bunglow, Satellite, Ahmedabad – 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 8758 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Sakar Sharma, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R.

1. Sanjiv Khurana Rs. 30,000/- 2. R. M. Modi (Account writing fees) Rs. 50,000/- Sthapati Architecture and Interiors Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2011-12 3. Nilesh B. Soni Rs. 15,000/- Total Rs.1,05,000/- The AO during the assessment proceedings observed that the above expenditure has been incurred by the assessee without deducting the TDS

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2970/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T., M/S Deloitee Haskins & Sells, Circle-1(2), Vs. 31-Nutan Bharat Society, Vadodara. Alkapuri, Baroda.

1) of section 139'. This section 40(a)(ia) of the Act refers only to the duty to deduct tax and pay to government account. If there is any shortfall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payments falling under various TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

TDS was deducted, a credit of the same to be given to the assessees, irrespective of the year to which it relates. The pre-amended and the amended provisions of section 199 are extracted hereunder: "Section 199: Credit for tax deducted (1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

TDS was deducted, a credit of the same to be given to the assessees, irrespective of the year to which it relates. The pre-amended and the amended provisions of section 199 are extracted hereunder: "Section 199: Credit for tax deducted (1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government

AQUAFIL POLYMERS CO.PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, TDS CIRCLE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS), ITA No.1667/Mum/2010. On the other hand, ld.DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A). 5. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Section 201(1) has direct bearing on the controversy. Therefore, it is pertinent upon us to take note of this section. Relevant part of this section reads as under: 201. (1

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRECLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS) from Chhatisgarh 33,23,630 Surguja Power Ltd. on deposits with them TOTAL 33,23,630 From the above, it can be seen that the Company was mandatorily required to place a Deposit with M/s. Chhattisgarh Surguja Power Ltd. towards Gujarat’s share of power in Chhattisgarh Ultra Mega Power Project. Hence, interest on the same has been earned

BURT HILL DESIGN PVT. LTD. ( NOW KNOWN AS STANTEC CONSULTING PVT. LTD. ),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

192. However, the assessee has discharged these obligations and there are no pending issues about the same. Whether the seconded employees ITA Nos. 1954 & 2104/Ahd/2015 DCIT Vs. Burt Hill Design P Ltd & vice versa Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 4 of 9 continue to be in employment of the foreign entities or not is wholly irrelevant for this purpose. What

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE.1(1)(1)., AHMEDABAD vs. M/S.BURT HILL DESIGN PVT. LTD.(NOW STANTEC CONSULTING PVT. LTD.),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

192. However, the assessee has discharged these obligations and there are no pending issues about the same. Whether the seconded employees ITA Nos. 1954 & 2104/Ahd/2015 DCIT Vs. Burt Hill Design P Ltd & vice versa Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 4 of 9 continue to be in employment of the foreign entities or not is wholly irrelevant for this purpose. What

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

THE DY.DIT, (INTL. TAXN.)- 1,, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2398/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit (International Vodafone West Ltd. बनाम/ Taxation)-1 Vodafone House Ahmedabad Corporate Road V/S. Prahladnagar Off S.G. Highway Ahmedabad-380 051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacf 1190 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-Gandhinagar (Ahmedabad) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 02/06/2014, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Dy.Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation)-1, Ahmedabad (Ao) Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) The Dcit (Intl.Taxn.)-1 Vs. Vodafone West Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14

TDS payable along with interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the demand raised by the AO. While passing his order, the Ld.CIT(A) noted following points: 1. The assessee has not provided any specifications

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. CYTESPACE RESEARCH PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

192 of the Act on entire payment ITA Nos.3133/Ahd/2016 DCIT vs. Cytespace Research Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Year –2013-14 made to Mr. Lalit Pai. Hence, the entire expenditure was genuine and TDS was appropriately deducted on the same. Thus, the allegation of the learned AO that amount paid to Lalit Pai was without any business expediency is incorrect and without

VIJAYBHAI DASHRATHBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us: -

192. The ld. Departmental Representative primarily relied on the observations made by ld. CIT(A) in his order and confirmed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue for consideration before us is scope of Explanation 3 to section 271(1