M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, 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

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, 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

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

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI 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

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI 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

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INT.TAXA.-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

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, 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

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(1)(c) of the Act. Notice under Section 274

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, are that during the Financial Year 2015-16 the assessee made payment of interest amounting in aggregate to Rs.42,51,571/-. On verification of records, it was noticed that no tax had been deducted at source on the said payment as required by section 194A. The Assessing Officer recorded that an order under sections 201(1)/201

PROLIFE INDUSTRIES LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

TDS has been deducted on such interest payment. The assessee further submitted that loans received during the year are repaid in subsequent Assessment Years i.e. upto 2018-19. Therefore, the addition u/s.68 of the Act cannot be made merely on the ground that loan creditors have shown meagre income or addition was made based upon statement of entry provider. These

PROLIFE INDUSTRIES LTD.,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

TDS has been deducted on such interest payment. The assessee further submitted that loans received during the year are repaid in subsequent Assessment Years i.e. upto 2018-19. Therefore, the addition u/s.68 of the Act cannot be made merely on the ground that loan creditors have shown meagre income or addition was made based upon statement of entry provider. These

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

TDS, and late payment of taxes aggregating to Rs.\n34,56,637/-, which were directly related to specific assets or statutory\nliabilities and had no nexus with earning exempt income. The CIT(A)\naccepted this contention and directed that such interest should be excluded\nfrom the computation under Rule 8D(2)(ii). On re-computation, the interest\ndisallowance under Rule

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

274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 01.12.2011 was issued to the assessee. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) vide order dated 11.07.2012 deleted the addition made on account of employees’ contribution of PF and upheld the rest additions/disallowances. Against the order

F.M.AMIN CO(DASHRATH),DASHRATH vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

SECTION BE CANCELLED. 3) THE LEARNED A.O. HAS LEVIED INTEREST U/S 234B OF RS.6,20,796/- ND U/S 234C OF RS.12,759/- AND INTEREST U/S 234D OF RS.200/- TOTALLING RS.6,33,755/- THIS NEEDS TO BE DELETED. 4) THE APPELANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, AMEND AND OR ALTER ANY GROUND OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

TDS, and late payment of taxes aggregating to Rs.\n34,56,637/-, which were directly related to specific assets or statutory\nliabilities and had no nexus with earning exempt income. The CIT(A)\naccepted this contention and directed that such interest should be excluded\nfrom the computation under Rule 8D(2)(ii). On re-computation, the interest\ndisallowance under Rule

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

TDS, and late payment of taxes aggregating to Rs.\n34,56,637/-, which were directly related to specific assets or statutory\nliabilities and had no nexus with earning exempt income. The CIT(A)\naccepted this contention and directed that such interest should be excluded\nfrom the computation under Rule 8D(2)(ii). On re-computation, the interest\ndisallowance under Rule

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

section 145(3) and applied a GP rate of 12.5%, resulting in substantial additions. The CIT(A), however, granted partial relief by restricting the GP ITA No.254 to 256 and 274 to 276 /Ahd/2024 10 rate to 6%, which has been challenged in cross appeals. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that it is engaged in the business