THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

279] in case of liquidated damages income. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Metrochem Industries Ltd. [[2017] 79 taxmann.com 440 has also allowed deduction u/s 80IA on Kasar and discount which is similar in nature of rebate as discussed herein above. Relying upon decisions referred supra, the AO is directed to allow deduction u/s SOIA

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

279] in case of liquidated damages income. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Metrochem Industries Ltd. [[2017] 79 taxmann.com 440 has also allowed deduction u/s 80IA on Kasar and discount which is similar in nature of rebate as discussed herein above. Relying upon decisions referred supra, the AO is directed to allow deduction u/s SOIA

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

TDS u/s 40(a)(ia). 2.3 Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Assessing Officer / DRP ought to have appreciated that since the payments had already been made during the year under consideration and nothing was payable as at the end of the relevant year, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act were not applicable and consequently

SHRI VISHAL D PALANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, TDS-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS should have been deducted u/s.194C of the Act. On the these facts, the Hon'ble High Court observed and held as under :- "We heard the arguments of learned counsel. Under section 194C, the tax is to be deducted when a contract was entered into for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract between the contractor

SHRI VISHAL DILIP PALANY,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Vishal Dilip Palani, Income Tax Officer, C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate, Vs Ward 9(4), 903, Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Alopp 0931 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08/09/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xv, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A) In Short]” Dated 04.02.2013. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 357 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Giving Details Of The Deteriorating Health Of His Father As Well As Financial Problems Faced During The Relevant Period Which Resulted In The Said Delay. Keeping In View The Same, We Are Satisfied That There Was A Sufficient Cause For The Delay Of 357 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Learned Departmental Representative Has Not Raised Any Objection In This Regard. We, Therefore, Shri Vishal Dilip Palani Vs. Ito Ay : 2009-10 2

TDS should have been deducted u/s.194C of the Act. On the these facts, the Hon'ble High Court observed and held as under :- "We heard the arguments of learned counsel. Under section 194C, the tax is to be deducted when a contract was entered into for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract between the 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

TDS) [2023] 153 taxmann.com 496 (Bombay)/[2023] 294 Taxman 766 (Bombay)/[2023] 457 ITR 18 (Bombay)[18-07-2023], the Bombay High ITA Nos. 303&304/Ahd/2025 Shri Balashah Bava Sanstha Sarvajanik Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Years –N.A. - 6– Court held that when there is no limitation provided under sub-section (2) of section 279 for submission or consideration

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

TDS) [2023] 153 taxmann.com 496 (Bombay)/[2023] 294 Taxman 766 (Bombay)/[2023] 457 ITR 18 (Bombay)[18-07-2023], the Bombay High ITA Nos. 303&304/Ahd/2025 Shri Balashah Bava Sanstha Sarvajanik Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Years –N.A. - 6– Court held that when there is no limitation provided under sub-section (2) of section 279 for submission or consideration

THE ITO, WARD-8(4),, AHMEDABAD vs. VISHAL PLASTOMERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

279/- after making the following disallowances / additions to the total income of the assessee. 1. Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 162/- 2. Disallowance of Bad Debts Rs. 3,90,76,843/- 3. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) Rs. 15,01,561/- 4. Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) Rs. 3,341/- 5. Addition u/s 41(1) Rs.7,65,98,856/- 6. Disallowance

VISHAL PLASTOMERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

279/- after making the following disallowances / additions to the total income of the assessee. 1. Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 162/- 2. Disallowance of Bad Debts Rs. 3,90,76,843/- 3. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) Rs. 15,01,561/- 4. Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) Rs. 3,341/- 5. Addition u/s 41(1) Rs.7,65,98,856/- 6. Disallowance

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, SURAT vs. M/S. NEO STRUCTO CONSTRUCTION LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Neo Structo Construction Income-Tax, Vs Limited, Circle-1, Surat A-1, A-4, Narayan Park, Icchapore, Surat-395009 Pan : Aaacn 7717 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.C. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/08/2022

section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. Firstly, the amount should be written off as recoverable in the accounts of assessee for the previous year and secondly, the amount, which is ACIT Vs. Neo Structo Construction Ltd AY : 2010-11 4 sought to be written off should have be taken into account as income of the assessee in the previous

ADVANCE LIFESPACES PRIVATE LIMITED,ASARVA, AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, INCOME TAX OFFICE, VEJALPUR

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

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

TDS of Rs.884. The Return was selected for scrutiny assessment. The Assessing Officer rejected the books of account under section 145(3) of the Act, citing fall in gross profit to 0.71% from 4.49% in the immediately preceding year and also absence of unit-wise stock details. Therefore, the AO estimated gross profit at 9.94% (average of three years