THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AMIT INTERTRADE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2259/Ahd/2016 With C.O.No.162/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2007-2008 D.C.I.T., M/S. Amit Intertrade Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1(3), Vs. Iscon House, Ahmedabad. C.G. Road, Nr. Citi Bank, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

TDS and have also paid back the said ICD along with interest during F. Y I 2008-09. Appellant's main objection was that in view of the various decisions including special bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Asstt. CIT v/s. Bhaumik Colour (P) Ltd.[2009] 118 ITD 1 (Mum.) (SB) and jurisdictional High Court decision

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DHWANI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeal filed by revenue and cross objection filed by assessee are dismissed

TDS and have also paid back the said ICD along with interest. Appellant's main objection was that in view of the various decisions including special bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Asstt. CIT v/s. Bhaumik Colour (P.) Ltd.[2009] 118 ITD 1 (Mum.) (SB) and jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT v/s Daisy Packers

MEHSANA TALUKA MADHYAMIK TEACHARS CREDIT AND CONSUMERS SAHAKARI MANDALI,MEHSANA vs. ITO, WARD-2, MEHSANA PRESENTLY WARD-1, MEHSANA, MEHSANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

253/- 4. The solitary issue required to be adjudicated by this Tribunal is that whether the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, for the interest received from the Co-operative Banks. ITA Nos.1728 & 1923/Ahd/2025 Asst.Years 2015-16 & 2020-21 - 3– 5. The issue before us is to determined whether the co-operative bank

MEHSANA TALUKA MADHYAMIK TEACHARS CREDIT AND CONSUMERS SAHAKARI MANDALI,MEHSANA vs. ITO, WARD-2, MEHSANA PRESENTLY WARD-1, MEHSANA, MEHSANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

253/- 4. The solitary issue required to be adjudicated by this Tribunal is that whether the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, for the interest received from the Co-operative Banks. ITA Nos.1728 & 1923/Ahd/2025 Asst.Years 2015-16 & 2020-21 - 3– 5. The issue before us is to determined whether the co-operative bank

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

TDS certificate issued by the Executive Engineer. The assessee has raised RA bills, contractor & construction work bills for the activities undertaken by it at the part rate as agreed by in the tender and work contract & collected the payment for the same. g. The receipt of payment u/s.194C itself clearly indicates that the assessee company has acted as a contractor

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

TDS certificate issued by the Executive Engineer. The assessee has raised RA bills, contractor & construction work bills for the activities undertaken by it at the part rate as agreed by in the tender and work contract & collected the payment for the same. g. The receipt of payment u/s.194C itself clearly indicates that the assessee company has acted as a contractor

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

TDS certificate issued by the Executive Engineer. The assessee has raised RA bills, contractor & construction work bills for the activities undertaken by it at the part rate as agreed by in the tender and work contract & collected the payment for the same. g. The receipt of payment u/s.194C itself clearly indicates that the assessee company has acted as a contractor

SHRI BALASHAH BAVA SANSTHA SARVAJANIK TRUST,ANAND vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

253 Taxman 379 (Kerala)/[2018] 402 ITR 400 (Kerala)[04-01-2018], the High Court made the following observations: “The short question arising for consideration, is whether in the absence of a revised return, the Assessing Officer is precluded from considering, in a proceedings under section 143 the contention of the assessee that the capital gains disclosed in the return

SHRI BALASHAH BAVA SANSTHA SARVAJANIK TRUST,ANAND vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

253 Taxman 379 (Kerala)/[2018] 402 ITR 400 (Kerala)[04-01-2018], the High Court made the following observations: “The short question arising for consideration, is whether in the absence of a revised return, the Assessing Officer is precluded from considering, in a proceedings under section 143 the contention of the assessee that the capital gains disclosed in the return

OM YASH PROJECTS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.40/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2023-24 Om Yash Projects Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Office No. 1113, Aaron Spectra, बनाम/ Ward-3(1)(1), V/S. Rajpath Rangoli Road, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aacco4734C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kaushik Kejriwal & Ms. Kushboo Shah, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Additional / Joint From The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], Dated 26.11.2024, In Connection With The Intimation Under Section 143(1) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2023-24, Issued By The Centralized Processing Center (Cpc), Bangalore, Dated 09.01.2024. Om Yash Projects Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2023-24

Section(s)/ Rules of the IT Act 1 Rule 37BA Erroneous/Proportionate On the facts and circumstances of the case Disallowance of TDS Credit as well as law on the matter, the CIT(A) has erred in proportionately reducing the TDS credit based on turnover discrepancies between books of accounts and Form 26AS, even though the assessee has claimed TDS correctly

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:-

253 ITR) : "A conjoint reading of the provisions quoted above shows that the assessee is entitled to receive interest on the amount of refund at the rates prescribed in clauses (a) and (b) of sub- section (1) of section 244A. The rationale underlying this provision is to compensate the assessee in lieu of the deprivation of his property right

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

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. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

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. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

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. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

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. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

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. Admittedly, the payer is claiming an expense but the assessee is not showing corresponding income in its books of accounts as the work was not completed up to the certain stage. In fact the assessee accounts for the income upon the completion of level of work, therefore the advances from the customer are shown as liability in the books

DEEP MULTIPLEX PVT. LTD.,BARODA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) (1), BARODA

In the results, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.1719/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Deep Muliplex P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.1(1)(4) 9, Arunoday Society Baroda. Vs 2, Mangaljyot Apartment Alkapuri Baroda Pan : Aabck 4719 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/02/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross-objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression “sufficient cause” employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section