HUBTOWN BUS TERMINAL (AHMEDABAD) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE(TDS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on interest under section 194A of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) further held that there was no evidence on record to show that the interest liability had been waived by GSRTC. According to the Ld. CIT(Appeals), once the assessee had deducted tax at source, the obligation to deposit the same into the Government account was absolute, and failure

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

TDS on these payments, as required under Section 194A of the Act. The details of such amounts are: Name of Lender(s) Interest Paid (Rs.) Smt. Anshyaba B. Chudasama 1

DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

TDS on these payments, as required under Section 194A of the Act. The details of such amounts are: Name of Lender(s) Interest Paid (Rs.) Smt. Anshyaba B. Chudasama 1

BACKBONE TARMET NG JV,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, The Income-Tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aaaab 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 20.06.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Deciding Appeal Ex- Parte Without Appreciating That Business Of The Appellant Has Been Closed Since Covid-19 & Therefore, In Absence Of Any Office, Notice(S) Claimed To Be Have Been Served Through Email Could Not Be Communicated To The Partners Of The Appellant. Without Prejudice To This It Is Submitted That No Notice(S) Came To Be Served On The Appellant At The Designated Email Stated In Form No. 35 For The Purpose Of Service Of Notice(S). Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv Vs. Ito Ay : 2005-06 2

TDS pertaining to which was deposited by the assessee by the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Revenue challenged the order of the ITAT before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat who in turn upheld the judgement of the ITAT. The matter was further referred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court

NIMBESHWAR GUDADRAM DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) (PREVIOUSLY CIRCLE-3(3)), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

194A. In response to notice, the assessee admitted that TDS had not been deducted on such payments, on the ground that he was under the belief that TDS was not applicable in the case of NBFCs. The Assessing Officer held that the failure to deduct tax attracted disallowance of 30% of the expenditure under section

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Draipl-Kskel (Jv) Ito, Ward-9(2) 2Nd Floor, “Msk” Vs. Ahmedabad. Passport Office To Panjarapole Rd. Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaad 3825 B (Applicant) (Responent)

194A. As no tax was deducted, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) was made. The assessee’s defence that TDS was not deductible due to composite EMI payments was rejected. The AO noted that despite the legal restrictions being applicable and known to the assessee, it proceeded to claim deduction of Rs.2,42,98,174/- under section 80IA(4), which

SHREE HARI ENTERPRISE ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nfollowing terms:\n\ni) Issue No

TDS on professional payments and the valuation of closing stock, stating that the AO had already examined these issues.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "263", "143(3)", "142(1)", "194-I", "194J", "40(a)(ia)", "68", "194A

THE BAVLA GROUP SEVA SAHAKAR MANDALI LTD,BAVLA, AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(5), AHMEDABAD, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

1. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A)-3 Bengaluru, has erred in law and facts by confirming the disallowance of claim the deduction of Rs. 4,01,607/- under section 80P of the Act and therefore you Honors are requested to direct the Ld. AO to allow full deductions under section 80P of the Act. 2. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT

GRINDLY GASES & PETROCHEMICALS P. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Grindly Gases & Petrochemicals P. Ltd. The Jcit, Tds Range 303, B.N. Chambers Vadodara. R.C. Dutt Road Vadodara 390 007. Pan : Aaaccs 7129 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None : Shri Arvind Kumbhara, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

TDS Range, Vadodara, are that during the Financial Year 2015-16 the assessee made payment of interest amounting in aggregate to Rs.42,51,571/-. On verification of records, it was noticed that no tax had been deducted at source on the said payment as required by section 194A. The Assessing Officer recorded that an order under sections 201(1

DHANLAXMI CREDIT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, PATAN

In the result, Ground Number 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

194A (3) of the Act, it appears that it provides for exemption from deducting Tax Deducted at Source ['TDS' for short] from the income on interest other than interest on securities as the cooperative societies other than cooperative banks meaning thereby that the cooperative banks are liable to deduct TDS from the interest other than interest on securities. Therefore

SOHAMNAGAR CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY VIBHAG-III,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

194A (3) of the Act, it appears that it provides for exemption from deducting Tax Deducted at Source ['TDS' for short] from the income on interest other than interest on securities as the cooperative societies other than cooperative banks meaning thereby that the cooperative banks are liable to deduct TDS from the interest other than interest on securities. Therefore

DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR vs. THE SARDAR PAEL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: The Final Hearing Of The Appeal.

194A (3) of the Act, it appears that it provides for exemption from deducting Tax Deducted at Source [‘TDS’ for short] from the income on interest other than interest on securities as the cooperative societies other than cooperative banks meaning thereby that the cooperative banks are liable to deduct TDS from the interest other than interest on securities. Therefore

M/S. BAJAJ FOODS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

section 194A(3) of the Act the appellant was not required to deduct TDS out of such interest payment I am inclined with appellant's contention that Barclays bank is a scheduled commercial bank under Banking Regulation Act 1949 hence appellant is not required to deduct TDS u/s.194A of the Act and also cannot be held in default u/s.201

SHREE UMIYA CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, ITA No.56/Ahd/2025 for A

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

TDS statement under Section 194A interest received other than interest on securities was Rs.2,38,578/-. The Assessing Officer observed that the interest income earned from these Institutions was claimed for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act and thus the Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.23,03,488/- earned as interest income. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order

SHREE UMIYA CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE- GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, ITA No.56/Ahd/2025 for A

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

TDS statement under Section 194A interest received other than interest on securities was Rs.2,38,578/-. The Assessing Officer observed that the interest income earned from these Institutions was claimed for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act and thus the Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.23,03,488/- earned as interest income. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI VIPINBHAI SOMABHAI PUJARA, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS u/s 194A from payments by way of financial charges aggregating to Rs 1,63.64,831/- to NBFCs and thereby confirming that the provisions of section

SHRI VIPINBHAI SOMABHAI PUJARA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS u/s 194A from payments by way of financial charges aggregating to Rs 1,63.64,831/- to NBFCs and thereby confirming that the provisions of section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. THE GUJARAT STATE CO. OP. HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

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

194A (3), it appears that it provides for exemption from deducting Tax Deducted at Source from the income on interest other than interest on securities as the cooperative societies other than cooperative banks meaning thereby that the cooperative banks are liable to deduct TDS from the interest other than interest on securities. Therefore it cannot be said that cooperative banks