THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, BARODA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

TDS on delayed payment charges (viii) Disallowance on upgradation of software expenses (ix) Charging of interest under section 234B on book Profits u/s. 115JB (x) Loss due to foreign exchange difference rate 7. As the first five issues are being covered in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 3003/Ahd/2010 & ors. relating to A.Ys. 2003- 04 & ors., dated

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, BARODA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

TDS on delayed payment charges (viii) Disallowance on upgradation of software expenses (ix) Charging of interest under section 234B on book Profits u/s. 115JB (x) Loss due to foreign exchange difference rate 7. As the first five issues are being covered in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 3003/Ahd/2010 & ors. relating to A.Ys. 2003- 04 & ors., dated

GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

TDS on delayed payment charges (viii) Disallowance on upgradation of software expenses (ix) Charging of interest under section 234B on book Profits u/s. 115JB (x) Loss due to foreign exchange difference rate 7. As the first five issues are being covered in assessee’s own case in ITA No. 3003/Ahd/2010 & ors. relating to A.Ys. 2003- 04 & ors., dated

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ARVIND LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ARVIND MILLS LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2392/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04)

Section 195, either in accordance with DTAA with respective countries or Income Tax Act whichever is applicable. The rates of TDS are specified in the respective DTAA's. However, it was seen that the assessee had not deducted TDS on professional consultancy fees. Failure to deduct TDS on professional consultancy fees resulted in non levy of TDS of Rs.4011817 shown

GULMOHAR PARK MALL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

section 194 I of the Act which deals with TDS on Rent from letting out property. This TDS made by various parties also confirms the fact that the assessee derived the Rent income which is liable to be treated under the head of House Property only and can be bring to tax under the head of Business Income

GULMOHAR PARK MALL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

section 194 I of the Act which deals with TDS on Rent from letting out property. This TDS made by various parties also confirms the fact that the assessee derived the Rent income which is liable to be treated under the head of House Property only and can be bring to tax under the head of Business Income

ITO, WARD-2(1) (1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. EYLEX FILMS PVT. LTD., RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

TDS is required to be deducted for the payment of film distribution share. The relevant extract of the decision is reproduced hereunder:- "6. From the above, it is clear that section 194C would be applicable if any person is making payment of any sum to any resident for carrying out any work. In the case under consideration before

ITO, WARD-2(1) (1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. EYLEX FILMS PVT. LTD., RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

TDS is required to be deducted for the payment of film distribution share. The relevant extract of the decision is reproduced hereunder:- "6. From the above, it is clear that section 194C would be applicable if any person is making payment of any sum to any resident for carrying out any work. In the case under consideration before

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. JAY CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal ITA 2693/Ahd/2014, ITA 305/Ahd/2015, cross objection 01/Ahd/2015 & 41/Ahd/2015 all are dismissed

TDS has not been deducted was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the act. 4. Aggrieved assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee stating that commission paid to non-resident agent was not liable to tax under

THE DCIT(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. JAY CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal ITA 2693/Ahd/2014, ITA 305/Ahd/2015, cross objection 01/Ahd/2015 & 41/Ahd/2015 all are dismissed

TDS has not been deducted was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the act. 4. Aggrieved assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee stating that commission paid to non-resident agent was not liable to tax under

THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. KRONE FINSTOCK PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2917/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Income Tax Krone Finstock Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Officer, “Monarch House” Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Opp: Ishwar Bhuwan, Ahmedabad Nr. Commerce Six Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacck 9850 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. N. Divatia, A.R.

section 40A(2)(b) of the I. T. Act, 1961. It was also observed that assessee company have its client base in Ahmedabad since long and there was no reason to utilise the infrastructure facility of Monarch Research and Brokerage Pvt. Ltd. and Monarch Project and Finmarkets Ltd., Guregaon, situated outside Ahmedabad. As per the MOU agreement which was executed

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRECLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS) from Chhatisgarh 33,23,630 Surguja Power Ltd. on deposits with them TOTAL 33,23,630 From the above, it can be seen that the Company was mandatorily required to place a Deposit with M/s. Chhattisgarh Surguja Power Ltd. towards Gujarat’s share of power in Chhattisgarh Ultra Mega Power Project. Hence, interest on the same has been earned

TRANSWIND COMMUNICATION ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS vis a vis income offered for tax in the return of income. The assessee has confronted vide order sheet entry dated 22.11.2012 with the said discrepancy and the assessee accepted the said fact that it cannot explain the said difference and the same was offered for tax. If the case of the assessee would not have been taken into

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

292,700 518-11 1,953,900 1,953,900 630-13 9,165,249 9,165,249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand

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

292,700 518-11 1,953,900 1,953,900 630-13 9,165,249 9,165,249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand

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

292,700 518-11 1,953,900 1,953,900 630-13 9,165,249 9,165,249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand

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

292,700 518-11 1,953,900 1,953,900 630-13 9,165,249 9,165,249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand

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

292,700 518-11 1,953,900 1,953,900 630-13 9,165,249 9,165,249 635-13 6,759,563 2,440,187 9,199,749 667-14 272,700 272,700 Grand