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:

234/- was made under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on interest expenses related to fleet card

NEELKANTH DEVELOPERS,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

TDS and raised the tax demand for the balance amount, along with interest under section 234 A and 234C of the act, respectively

NEELKANTH DEVELOPERS,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

TDS and raised the tax demand for the balance amount, along with interest under section 234 A and 234C of the act, respectively

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

TDS had been deducted as per I.T.A No. 1647/Ahd/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 11 M/s. Bajaj Foods Ltd, vs. ITO Section 195 of the Act. Disallowance of the entire interest paid to the bank of Rs. 2,37,234

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)

Section 199 has been amended w.e.f. 01.04.08 (ie. from Asst. Year 2008-09) such that if tax is deducted and paid to the Government, then irrespective of the fact that corresponding income pertains to that previous year or any other year, the "TDS credit" is to be given in the "year in which tax is deducted" and paid to Govt

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)

Section 199 has been amended w.e.f. 01.04.08 (ie. from Asst. Year 2008-09) such that if tax is deducted and paid to the Government, then irrespective of the fact that corresponding income pertains to that previous year or any other year, the "TDS credit" is to be given in the "year in which tax is deducted" and paid to Govt

CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

234/- from eligible R&D expense. The ld. A.R. explained that the assessee had made additional claim of Rs.60,36,617/- being 50% of weighed deduction in respect of return towards CRO realization, which was suo moto disallowed by the assessee on a conservative basis. He explained that the assessee had earned certain income from contract research carried for other

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

234/- from eligible R&D expense. The ld. A.R. explained that the assessee had made additional claim of Rs.60,36,617/- being 50% of weighed deduction in respect of return towards CRO realization, which was suo moto disallowed by the assessee on a conservative basis. He explained that the assessee had earned certain income from contract research carried for other

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MS. JAGSON COLORCHEM LIMITED, PHASE -II GIDC ESTATE VATVA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years:2018-19

234)(SC) had held that where payment to non-resident is made, obligation to deduct tax at source does not arise at the moment a remittance is made to a non-resident; rather it arises only when such remittance is a sum chargeable under the Act, i.e. chargeable ACIT vs. Ms. Jagson colorchem limited, AY- 2018-19 6 under sections

SARVODAYA TRADING CO.,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, S.K. WARD-2,, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS U/s. 40 (a) (ia) of I.T Act on Payment made to various Laborer on Cash basic. 2. The Honorable CIT Appeals-2 has erred in facts and in law, in confirming Amt. of Rs. 3,31,008/- as Interest income on advances given to party as a interest free advances. Sarvodaya Trading Co. vs. ITO Asst.Year

GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,KHANJI BHAVAN vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN(VEJALPUR), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21

TDS provisions, expenses incurred for earning exempt income, ICDS adjustments, and refund claims. Accordingly, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued on 29.06.2021 and 15.12.2021 respectively, and the assessee furnished its responses thereunder. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had earned exempt income amounting to Rs.8,28,12,464/- during

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

234 wherein in the context of section 2(15) of the Act, education has been explained as a process of training and developing the knowledge, skill, mind and character of students by schooling by way of systematic instruction, schooling or training. Therefore, any form of education activity involving imparting of systematic training in order to develop the knowledge, skill, mind

ISHIT KAMLESHBHAI SHETH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

234 Τaxman 51 (Calcutta) in order to submit that if there was\nno disallowance or addition made by the Assessing Officer in the\nincome as disclosed in pursuance of notice under Section 148 of the\nAct, no penalty can be levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act.\n12. Insofar as ITA No. 5277/Mum/2024 (assessment year

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CIRCLE-TDS, VADODARA

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

TDS on the leave encashment paid. Hence, the Revenue Authorities treated the assessee as in default under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. 3.2 The Revenue held that the payments are in excess of Rs. 3 lakhs, and since the recipients are neither State Government nor Central Government employees, hence the exemption limit cannot exceed Rs.3 lakhs

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CIRCLE-TDS, VADODARA

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

TDS on the leave encashment paid. Hence, the Revenue Authorities treated the assessee as in default under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. 3.2 The Revenue held that the payments are in excess of Rs. 3 lakhs, and since the recipients are neither State Government nor Central Government employees, hence the exemption limit cannot exceed Rs.3 lakhs

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CIRCLE-TDS, VADODARA

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

TDS on the leave encashment paid. Hence, the Revenue Authorities treated the assessee as in default under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. 3.2 The Revenue held that the payments are in excess of Rs. 3 lakhs, and since the recipients are neither State Government nor Central Government employees, hence the exemption limit cannot exceed Rs.3 lakhs

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CIRCLE-TDS, VADODARA

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

TDS on the leave encashment paid. Hence, the Revenue Authorities treated the assessee as in default under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. 3.2 The Revenue held that the payments are in excess of Rs. 3 lakhs, and since the recipients are neither State Government nor Central Government employees, hence the exemption limit cannot exceed Rs.3 lakhs

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VIJAY M. MISTRY CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2938/Ahd/2011, 2939/Ahd/2011, 2286/Ahd/2012, 268/Ahd/2015, 269/Ahd/2015, 502/Ahd/2017, 1145/Ahd/2019 & 1468/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17) Address In A.Ys. 2007-08, बनाम/ 2008-09 & 2009-10 Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, 501, Swagat, C. G. Road, Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad – & Bhavan, Ambawadi, 380006 (Gujarat) Ahmedabad Address In A.Ys. 2010-11 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Range-8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Bhavan, Ambawadi, Society, Opp. Gulbai Ahmedabad Tekra Police Choki & Ambawadi, Ahmedabad – 380015 Address In A.Ys. 2011-12 Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax (Osd) & Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Society, Opp. Gulbai Bhavan, Ambawadi, Tekra Police Choki, Ahmedabad Ambawadi, Ahmedabad –

TDS has been made u/s 194C which shows that the contracted as well as the contractor have themselves treated the relationship as a contractual arrangement. iii. Various government contractees have issued tenders for works contract to the lowest bidder. iv. Ownership risks never vested in the assessee. ITA Nos. 2938/Ahd/2011 & 8 Ors. (Vijay M. Mistry Construction Pvt. Ltd.) A.Ys