THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NASCENT INFO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & M/S. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2828/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ Ito M/S. Nascent Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Ward-3(1)(1), Vs. A-805, Sapath-Iv, Opp. Ahmedabad Karnavati Club, Ahmedabad- 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aac Cn3 670 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Santosh Karnani, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By: Mehul K. Patel, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 13/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2019 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed - Am:

TDS in respect of security charges. 16.1 The provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act states that the penalty

VIJAYBHAI DASHRATHBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us: -

section 271(1)(c), the Revenue has to establish that there was no reasonable cause for failure to furnish return of income by the assessee. In the instant set of facts, assessee during the year is in receipt of interest income on which the TDS

ARROW DIGITAL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1568/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Arrow Digital Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, 1005-06, 10Th Floor, Vs. Cirle-1(1)(1) Aditya Complex, Ahmedabad. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-38006. Pan: Aaeca2215J

TDS and deposits the same to the income tax Asstt. Year 2012-13 7 Department. In view of the above, we hold that the assessee has not furnished any inaccurate particular of income deliberately. Accordingly he cannot be visited with the penalty under section 271

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), , AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD.(ON BEHALF OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS is warranted. 129. Before parting, it is also important to note that the ITAT in the own case of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA No. 1718/AHD/2011 has set aside the identical issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after verifying whether payees have included the amount received from the assessee

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS is warranted. 129. Before parting, it is also important to note that the ITAT in the own case of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA No. 1718/AHD/2011 has set aside the identical issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after verifying whether payees have included the amount received from the assessee

BHAVESHKUMAR SHANTILAL JANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13

TDS under Section 40a(ia) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,52,650/-. In respect of the said additions, the Assessing Officer initiated penal proceedings under Section 271

SHRI AMRUTBHAI JAGMALBHAI DESAI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavasstt. Year : 2009-2010 Amrutbhai Jagmalbhai Desai Ito, Ward-7(1) Ahmedabad. 146/17/18, Chinubhainagar Bus Stand Vs. Singarwa Road Kathwada Ahmedabad 382 430. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None – Written Submissions Revenue By : Ms.Sonia Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2017 आदेश/O R D E R

271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, however, filed written submissions. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of appeal of the assessee, after hearing the ld.DR and considering material available. 4. Brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed his return of income on 27.10.2010 declaring total income

UNIWORLD EDUTECH PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1142/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-12 Uniworld Edutech Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 605, Samedh Complex, Vs. Circle-4(1)(1), Near Associates Petrol Pump, Ahmedabad. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aabcu0357N

TDS certificate. Further, the AO held the same as an act of furnishing inaccurate particular of income and levied the penalty of Rs. 1,45,456/- being 100% of the amount of tax sought to be evaded under the provisions of explanation 1 to section 271

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Draipl-Kskel (Jv) Ito, Ward-9(2) 2Nd Floor, “Msk” Vs. Ahmedabad. Passport Office To Panjarapole Rd. Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaad 3825 B (Applicant) (Responent)

TDS despite being aware of the legal requirements amounted to a default attracting penal consequences under section 271(1)(c). Therefore

AMJAY MEDIMAX INDIA PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT.,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS deduction does not arise. The Ld. D.R. further submitted that the said finding cannot be taken into account while deciding the penalty order under Section 271

SHRI BHAVESHBHAI N. PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ld. Cit (A) & Agreed To The Addition Made By The Ao On Account Of Stcg For Rs. 41,39,180.00. Accordingly The Same Was Confirmed By The Learned Cit (A).

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO in support of his decision also relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of union of India versus Dharmendra textiles processors reported in 306 ITR 277. 12.5 Similarly, the learned CIT (A) confirmed the order of the AO after placing reliance on the judgment

ARVIND LIFESTYLE BRANDS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1817/Ahd/2016 2012-13 Arvind Lifestyle Brands D.C.I.T, Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), Arvind Mills Premises, Ahmedabad. Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025. Pan No. Aaach7252A 2. 2056/Ahd/2016 2012-13 D.C.I.T, Arvind Lifestyle Circle-1(1)(2), Brands Ltd., Ahmedabad. 3. 2377/Ahd/2017 2013-14 Arvind Lifestyle Brands D.C.I.T, Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad. 4. 2618/Ahd/2017 2014-15 Arvind Lifestyle Brands Ito Ward-1(1)(3) Ltd., Ahmedabad

Section 43B), there really could be no reason for refusing deduction for employees' contribution as long as payment was made before the due date for filing the income-tax return; (b) that the appellant's contention found support from several authorities to which it had referred in its appellate proceedings. In law and in the facts and circumstances

M/S. KAMLESH GANDHI INFRASTRUCTURE,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS to the tune of Rs. 12,272/-. Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was also initiated for furnishing inaccurate

SUJAG FINE CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 3527 & 3528/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2007-08 Sujag Fine Chemicals Pvt. The Asst. Commissioner Ltd., Vs Of Income Tax, 42/6 & 7, Gidc Estate, At & Circle – 4, Post, Baroda. Nandesari, Dist. Baroda – 391 340 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 2989 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Sunil Talati, C.A. Assessee By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R.

section 271(1)(c) would be deemed to be representing the income in respect of which inaccurate particulars have been furnished.” 6. In the light of above, let us examine the facts of present appeals. A perusal of penalty order would indicate that first item of addition considered by the Assessing Officer for visiting the assessee with ITA No.3527 & 3528/Ahd/2015

SUJAG FINE CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 3527 & 3528/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2007-08 Sujag Fine Chemicals Pvt. The Asst. Commissioner Ltd., Vs Of Income Tax, 42/6 & 7, Gidc Estate, At & Circle – 4, Post, Baroda. Nandesari, Dist. Baroda – 391 340 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 2989 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Sunil Talati, C.A. Assessee By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R.

section 271(1)(c) would be deemed to be representing the income in respect of which inaccurate particulars have been furnished.” 6. In the light of above, let us examine the facts of present appeals. A perusal of penalty order would indicate that first item of addition considered by the Assessing Officer for visiting the assessee with ITA No.3527 & 3528/Ahd/2015

THE ITO, WARD-9(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ATUL S. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

TDS payment. It is therefore, in my view the satisfaction of furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be drawn for such genuine and allowable transactions for which all the details were reflected and submitted. The A.O in a mechanical way after the addition being confirmed applied explanation 1 to section 271

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS (INR 51,34, 571/-) 42. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that ground number 6 is not being pressed, since this issue has been rectified by way of subsequent order under Section 154 of the Act. 43. Accordingly, ground number 6 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not pressed. 44. Ground

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS (INR 51,34, 571/-) 42. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that ground number 6 is not being pressed, since this issue has been rectified by way of subsequent order under Section 154 of the Act. 43. Accordingly, ground number 6 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not pressed. 44. Ground