THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Us.

207 ITR 0080 (Mad-HC): Conclusion: Interest earned by assessee a priority industry from deposits made with Electricity Board in order to ensure power supply, is attributable to priority industry, hence eligible for deduction under s. 80-1". > CIT vs. Seshasavee Papers & Board Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 0421 (Mad-HC): Conclusion: Assessee was entitled to deduction under

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1`),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT MICROWAX LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2503/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Dcit, M/S. Gujarat Microwax बनाम/ Cir – 2(1)(1), Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ahmedabad. 401 & 02, Sarthik Square, Sarkhej Gandhinagar Highway, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad – 380 054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 5593 P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. Jayant Jhveri, Sr.D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G.C. Pipara, C.A.

TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. 2.20. Further, reliance is placed on the following decisions/judgments:- * ACIT Vs. Modern Insulators Ltd. [56 DTR 362 (Jaipur Trib.)] * Ishikawajama - Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. Vs. Director of Income Tax [207 CTR 361] DCIT v. M/s. Gujarat Microwax Pvt Ltd. Asst.Year –2013-14 * Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Divi

THY ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), , AHMEDABAD vs. M & B ENGINEERING LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

TDS provisions to commission paid to overseas/non-resident agents by Indian Exporters. 2.19 Further, reliance is placed on the following decisions/judgments: • ACIT Vs. Modern Insulators Ltd. [56 DTR 362 (Jaipur Trib.)] • Ishikawajama - Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. Vs. Director of Income Tax [207 CTR 361] • Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Divi's Laboratories Ltd. [(2011) 60 DTR (Hyd) (Trib

DCIT, CIRCLE-2 (1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. JAGSON COLORCHEM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं. Ita No.112/Ahd/2017 With Co No. 32/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Asstt. Years: 2013-14

section 195 would not apply. • ACIT Vs.Modern Insulators Ltd. [56 DTR 362 (Jaipur Trib.)] • Ishikawajama - Harlma Heavy Industries Ltd. Vs. Director of Income Tax [207 CTR 361] • Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dlvi's Laboratories Ltd. [(2011) 60 DTR (Hyd) (Trib) 210] • ITO, International Taxation, Chennai Vs. Prasad Production [(2010) 125 ITD 263 Chennai) (SB) • ACIT, Circle

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 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

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 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

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 DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS on payment ,of Rs 19,86,207/- made on account of consultancy fees to tax residents of USA & Canada without appreciating that such incomes were taxable in India in terms of Section

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS on payment ,of Rs 19,86,207/- made on account of consultancy fees to tax residents of USA & Canada without appreciating that such incomes were taxable in India in terms of Section

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS on payment ,of Rs 19,86,207/- made on account of consultancy fees to tax residents of USA & Canada without appreciating that such incomes were taxable in India in terms of Section

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS on payment ,of Rs 19,86,207/- made on account of consultancy fees to tax residents of USA & Canada without appreciating that such incomes were taxable in India in terms of Section

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS on payment ,of Rs 19,86,207/- made on account of consultancy fees to tax residents of USA & Canada without appreciating that such incomes were taxable in India in terms of Section