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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

6 It is therefore prayed that the impugned penalty order u/s. 272A(2)(g) may please be cancelled.” 8. During the course of hearing before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee raised common contentions against the levy of both the penalties and filed brief submission in writing in this regard, which are reproduced hereunder: > Issues involved in the captioned appeal

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

6 It is therefore prayed that the impugned penalty order u/s. 272A(2)(g) may please be cancelled.” 8. During the course of hearing before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee raised common contentions against the levy of both the penalties and filed brief submission in writing in this regard, which are reproduced hereunder: > Issues involved in the captioned appeal

SHRI GIRISHKUMAR RAMNARAYAN SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-2, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS whereby the appellant is treated in default u/s 206C and demand of Rs.3,07,689/- is raised u/s. 206C(1), and Rs. 2,46,151/- is raised u/s 206C(7), totaling to Rs.5,53,840/-. Girishkumar Ramnarayan Shah vs.ITO Asst.Year –2012-13 - 2– (4) That the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in not giving adequate and reasonable opportunity

SHRI UMESHKUMAR HARILALA SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-3, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

TDS)-3 A/401, Sukan Apartment, Nr. St. Ahmedabad Merry School, Naroda, Ahmedabad-382330 [PAN No.AGSPS6516P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jinesh Shah, A.R. Appellant by : Respondent by: Shri Dr. Mukesh Jain, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 15.09.2022 02.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.06.2018 passed

OFFICE OF THE GEOLOGIST,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO (TDS), GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2011-12

TDS), B-Block, Third Floor, Vs 401, Udyog Bhawan, Bahumali Bhavan, Hajipura, Sector-11, Gandhinagar Himatnagar, Sabarkantha-383001 PAN : AAALO 0111 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Divatia, AR Revenue by : Shri Mukesh Thakwani, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 14/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/07/2022 आदेश

BANK OF BARODA,ANAND vs. THE ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

TDS changes were introduced in the Act. Section 234E as introduced for the first time to provide for charging of fee for late filing of the statements. Such fee would be levied at the rate of Rs.200/- for every day of failure subject to the maximum amount of tax deductible or collectible as the case may be. Section 271H

NIRMA LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCTI , CIRCLE-3(1)(1) NOW DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nirma Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-380 009 Circle-3(1)(1), Pan : Aaacn 5350 K Ahmedabad-380009 अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09.10.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 10.04.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee Is As Follows:-

6. We have considered the rival submissions carefully on this issue. Section 244A deals with the grant of interest on refund of any amount of tax which becomes due to the assessee in terms of the provisions of Act. Clauses (a) and (b) of sub- section (1) of section 244A deal with two different situations. Clause (a) deals with refund

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(OSD),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

6 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 29. Thus, ITA No. 1871/Ahd/2012 filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2009-10 is partly allowed. 30. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 2578/Ahd/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 read as under: “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent

SUZLON GUJARAT WIND PARK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the above\nterms

6 and 7 represent a common ground and is accordingly\nbeing disposed of.\n10.\nWe have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on\nrecord. It would be useful to reproduce section 244 of the Act for ready\nreference:\nInterest on refunds.\n244A. (1) [Where refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee 94 under this

KIRI INDUSTRIES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

206C(7) towards late payment of TDS. Principal CIT observed that the AO did not disallow these expenses, which were categorized as “penalties” by the Auditors of the assessee company. Principal CIT was of the view that the AO's failure to disallow this amount led to the assessment order as being erroneous and prejudicial to the interests