XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS), with penalty under section 271C of the Act being levied for not depositing the TDS in time, while that

XCELLON EDUCATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS), with penalty under section 271C of the Act being levied for not depositing the TDS in time, while that

GRINDLY GASES & PETROCHEMICALS P. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Grindly Gases & Petrochemicals P. Ltd. The Jcit, Tds Range 303, B.N. Chambers Vadodara. R.C. Dutt Road Vadodara 390 007. Pan : Aaaccs 7129 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None : Shri Arvind Kumbhara, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

TDS Range, Vadodara vide order dated 28.02.2023, in proceedings initiated for failure to deduct tax at source on interest under section 194A of the Act. 2 2. Facts of the Case 2.1 The brief facts, as culled out from the penalty order under section 271C

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

271C of the Act on account of default on TDS payments. It is submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated that provisions of Section

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

271C of the Act on account of default on TDS payments. It is submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated that provisions of Section

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

271C of the Act on account of default on TDS payments. It is submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated that provisions of Section

TORQUE AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(TSD),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

271C of the Act on account of default on TDS payments. It is submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated that provisions of Section

RANCHHODBHAI VITTHALBHAI PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ADDL.CIT,TDS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

TDS under Section 194IA of the Act. The Assessing Officer invoked provision of Section 271C of the Income Tax Act as the assessee

SNEHALBEN KAMALBHAI PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ADDL.CIT,TDS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

TDS under Section 194IA of the Act. The Assessing Officer invoked provision of Section 271C of the Income Tax Act as the assessee

ASHVINKUMAR NARANBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-WARD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.722/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ashvinkumar Naranbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ 43, Shankar Society Part-1 Tds Ward-1 V/S. Near Meerambica Road Ahmedabad – 380 014 Opp. Amikunj Bus Stand Naranpura Ahmedabad – 380 013 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aeipp 9274 R अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.02.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Confirming The Demand Raised Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) By The Ito, Tds Ward 1, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Assessing Officer Or Ao”], In Relation To A.Y. 2015–16. Ashvinkumar Naranbhai Patel Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2015-16

TDS Default (Rs.) Interest u/s 201(1A) (Rs.) Total (Rs.) Shiholi 70,000/- 60,900/- 1,30,900/- Vastral 1,13,333/- 92,933/- 2,06,266/- Total 1,83,333/- 1,53,833/- 3,37,166/- 3.1. A separate proposal for penalty under section 271C

ARCHANABEN RAJENDRASINGH DEVAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, as indicated\nabove

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1465/Ahd/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16\nArchanaben Rajendrasingh\nDeval\nबनाम /\nv/s.\nThe Income Tax Officer\nTDS Ward-1,\nAhmedabad – 380 014\n42, Tirth Bhumi Co-op. Society\nNear Dhara Soap Factory\nNikol Gam Road,\nNikol, Ahmedabad – 382 350\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AHZPD 2745 D\n(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)\nAssessee by :\nShri Jaimin Sha

TDS provisions of section 1941A is not\napplicable, which ground is not considered by the CIT(A) and therefore the order\npassed by CIT(A) is against the provision of law and therefore the addition made\nu/s 201(1)/201(1A) require to be deleted.\n4. That the assesse has purchase agriculture land along with her co-owner for\nRs.1

RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS, VADODARA

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

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

TDS) passed order under Section 201(1) of the Act treating the assessee as assessee in default and proposed for initiation of penalty proceedings. The penalty proceedings under Section 271C

THE DY.DIT, (INTL. TAXN.)- 1,, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2398/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit (International Vodafone West Ltd. बनाम/ Taxation)-1 Vodafone House Ahmedabad Corporate Road V/S. Prahladnagar Off S.G. Highway Ahmedabad-380 051 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacf 1190 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-Gandhinagar (Ahmedabad) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”], Dated 02/06/2014, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Dy.Director Of Income-Tax (International Taxation)-1, Ahmedabad (Ao) Under Section 201(1) & 201(1A) The Dcit (Intl.Taxn.)-1 Vs. Vodafone West Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14

TDS on these payments. 8.6. Thus, the decisions of the Ld.CIT(A) are upheld. Therefore, Ground No. 1 of the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Since the grounds related to applicability of section 195A, 201(1A) and penalty proceedings u/s 271C

BANK OF BARODA,BHARUCH vs. THE JT. CIT (TDS), VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the appellant is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 8/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Bank Of Baroda The Jt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Gnfc Complex Branch, Income Tax (Tds) Vs. Gnfc Corporate Bulding, Baroda Narmadanagar – 392015, Bharuch "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb1534F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) None अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20/03/2024 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Appellant Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Vadodara-5 (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Arising Out Of Penalty Order Dated 28.04.2016 Passed By The Jt.Cit (Tds), Baroda, Under Section 271C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appeal Is Barred By Limitation For 252 Days. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant In Spite Of The Matter Being Listed For Several Occasions & Service Of Notice By Rpad. Upon

TDS), Baroda, under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year

KESHAVPRIYA CORP PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, TDS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on purchase of aforesaid properties under Section 194-IA of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed order under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act on 18.02.2020, alongwith order of penalty under Section 271(c) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source on purchase of such properties. 7. In appeal before

KESHAVPRIYA CORP PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 TDS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS on purchase of aforesaid properties under Section 194-IA of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed order under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act on 18.02.2020, alongwith order of penalty under Section 271(c) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source on purchase of such properties. 7. In appeal before

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4),, VADODARA vs. SHRI PRADEEPSHANKAR B. JHA,, VADODARA

In the result, ground no. 4 of Revenue ‘s appeal is dismissed

TDS. 52. In appeal before ld. CIT(A), he observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by CIT(A) in assessee’s own appeal against order u/s. 271C of the Act for A.Y. 2012-13. In the aforesaid order, the ld. CIT(A) held as under:- “5.5 In view of the above discussion

THE ITO, WARD-2(4),, BARODA vs. SHRI PRADEEPSHANKAR B. JHA, BARODA

In the result, ground no. 4 of Revenue ‘s appeal is dismissed

TDS. 52. In appeal before ld. CIT(A), he observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by CIT(A) in assessee’s own appeal against order u/s. 271C of the Act for A.Y. 2012-13. In the aforesaid order, the ld. CIT(A) held as under:- “5.5 In view of the above discussion