THE KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO.-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS, a sum of ₹16,00,00,000/- as advance tax, and a sum of ₹1,90,00,000/- as self-assessment tax, which was paid on 30th July 2011. The return was processed under section 143(1) by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) on 7th August 2012, resulting in a refund of ₹93,20,690/-. Thereafter, the case

THE ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1384/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08)

section 244A as made by the AO and as per appellant: Particulars As per AO As per Appellant Total income as 18,21.02.564 18,21,02,564 determined in the order under consideration Tax on total income 5,46,30,769 5,46,30,769 Add: Surcharge 54,63,077 54,63,077 Add: Education cess

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KANDLA PORT TRUST,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Refunds - Interest on -Assessment year 1993-94 - During assessment year 1993-94 amount paid by assessee towards TDS

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS credit of ₹1,11,297/- was allowed by the Department, and refund was accordingly issued vide rectification order under section 154 dated 22.07.2020. The refund and interest granted under section 244A

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI SIDDHATHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

TDS, TCS. Advance Tax or Self- Assessment Tax paid u/s 140A. 4. Proviso to Sec. 244A(1) as relied upon is not applicable to the facts of the case, which is in fact governed by the provisions of Sec. 244A(1)(h), being in any other case. The amount of Rs. 75,04,960/-as determined to be refundable

TOSHIBA TECHNICAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. THE ADIT.,(INTL.TAXN.)-2, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year :2015-16 Toshiba Technical Services Vs. Acit, International International Corporation Taxation-2 (India Project Office) Ahmedabad. B-/12 Vijay Wadi Niwas Chs Ltd. Lokmanya Tilak Road Mulund East, Mumbai Pan : Aabct 9577 D

TDS to the extent of Rs. 2,29,07,477. 5. Interest under section 234D The learned AO erred in levying interest under section 234D of the Act. 6. Interest under section 244A

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

244A of the Act. 21. That the above grounds of objection are independent of, and without prejudice to one another. 22. That the appellant craves leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing.” 3. The issues raised by the assessee

M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

244A of the Act. 21. That the above grounds of objection are independent of, and without prejudice to one another. 22. That the appellant craves leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing.” 3. The issues raised by the assessee

TORRENT SOLARGEN LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 90/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Torrent Solargen Limited Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम “Samanvay”, 600, Circle- 4(1)(2), Vs. Tapovan, Amabawadi, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadct0483G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vartik Chokshi, Advocate अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prasad Rao Waghe Annasaheb, Sr. Dr 27/08/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee (Tsl) Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.09.2022 For The Assessment Year 2016- 17. 2. There Was A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing Of This Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reason For Delay. It

244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 4. The brief facts of the case are that the original return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 was filed by the assessee on 16.10.2016 showing total income of Rs.16,86,17,460/-. The assessee had claimed TDS credit of Rs.8,93,784/- and advance tax credit of Rs.13

A. MENARINI INDIA PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee company engaged in the business of trading in pharmaceutical products on a whole sale basis in respect of phone projects, filed its return of income on 30.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. (-) 3,99,18,901, which

AESHA ASHISHBHAI SHAH LEGAL HEIR AND WIFE OF LATE ASHISH SUMATIBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1) PREVIOUSLY WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 143(3) on 19.02.2016 determining total income at Rs. 66,15,560/-. Additions were made on account of interest u/s 244A, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), disallowance of bad debts and addition u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee’s appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed on 24.10.2017. The matter then travelled to the Tribunal. Vide order

SARITA R JADON,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DCIT, PANCHMAHAL CIRCLE, GODHRA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

244A - Rs. 33,813/- Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - Rs. 6,73,079/- Labourand Wage Expenses - Rs. 37,50,342/- Piece work rate - Rs. 8,57,326/- Bogus Purchase - Rs. 9,48,054/- It is submitted that the assessee has filed all the details and evidences with regard to all the above claims showing that they are completely genuine and justifiable

SARITA R JADON,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DCIT, PANCHMAHAL CIRCLE, GODHRA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

244A - Rs. 33,813/- Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - Rs. 6,73,079/- Labourand Wage Expenses - Rs. 37,50,342/- Piece work rate - Rs. 8,57,326/- Bogus Purchase - Rs. 9,48,054/- It is submitted that the assessee has filed all the details and evidences with regard to all the above claims showing that they are completely genuine and justifiable

PARIMAL CHANDRAKANT ZAVERI,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

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

244A thereby assessed the total income at Rs. 98,41,250/-. 3.1. Perusal of the above assessment order by the Ld. PCIT, the assessee had sold a residential flats in Mumbai on 20.12.2014 for a consideration of Rs. 2.66 crores jointly with others and assesee’s 20% share was Rs. 53,20,000/-. The assessee has not offered the long

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

244A of Rs.8,80,103/-. Subsequently, the matter was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice dated 05.09.2012 u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee followed by a further questionnaire dated 12.04.2013 u/s 142(1) calling for specific details and documents. In response thereto certain details and documents were filed on 25.04.2014 by the assessee. However, due to change

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

244A of Rs.8,80,103/-. Subsequently, the matter was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice dated 05.09.2012 u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee followed by a further questionnaire dated 12.04.2013 u/s 142(1) calling for specific details and documents. In response thereto certain details and documents were filed on 25.04.2014 by the assessee. However, due to change

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

244A of Rs.8,80,103/-. Subsequently, the matter was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice dated 05.09.2012 u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee followed by a further questionnaire dated 12.04.2013 u/s 142(1) calling for specific details and documents. In response thereto certain details and documents were filed on 25.04.2014 by the assessee. However, due to change

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

244A of Rs.8,80,103/-. Subsequently, the matter was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice dated 05.09.2012 u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee followed by a further questionnaire dated 12.04.2013 u/s 142(1) calling for specific details and documents. In response thereto certain details and documents were filed on 25.04.2014 by the assessee. However, due to change

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. CHARUTAR AROGYA MANDAL,,

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS of Rs.32,16,342/-. An application for rectification u/s 154 dated 29.04.2015 and 25.09.2015 has been filed by the assessee with a request to grant the total expenditure of Rs.97,92,83,956/- since the same is applied for the object of the trust and refund of Rs.33,55,038/- along with interest u/s 244A of the Act. However