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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 272A(2)(g) of the Act for the impugned assessment years before us. 3. Both the penalties, it was common ground, were inter-related for the violation of the provisions of the Act pertaining to the tax deducted at source (TDS

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 272A(2)(g) of the Act for the impugned assessment years before us. 3. Both the penalties, it was common ground, were inter-related for the violation of the provisions of the Act pertaining to the tax deducted at source (TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICERS (TDS),, GANDHINAGAR vs. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2266/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

TDS)vs. M/s. Shri Rang Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.] A.Y. 2010—11 - 8 - Act No.2 of 2014 shall not be applicable retrospectively and therefore, no order under section 201(1) of the Act can be passed for which limitation had already expired prior to amended section 201(3

EAGLE STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

section of 194C by the payee 3 . A.Y. 2012-13 on account of deductee being transporter. In this regard the Annexurer to form 26Q is reproduced as under: ANNEXURE: DEDUCTEE WISE BREAK UP OF TDS

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

3+4) 5 6 Tax relief a Section 90 7a b Section 91 7b c Total (6a+6b) 6c 7 Net tax liability (5-6c) 7 8 Interest Payable a For default in furnishing the return (section 8a 234A) b For default in payment of advance tax 8b (section 234B) c For deferment of advance tax (section

M/S. BARODA AGRO CHEMICALS LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2509 to 2513/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. BARODA AGRO CHEMICALS LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2509 to 2513/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2504 to 2508/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2504 to 2508/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. BARODA AGRO CHEMICALS LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2509 to 2513/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. BARODA AGRO CHEMICALS LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2509 to 2513/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2504 to 2508/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2504 to 2508/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. RAVI PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2504 to 2508/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

M/S. BARODA AGRO CHEMICALS LTD.,,HALOL vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these 5 appeals are allowed

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.2509 to 2513/Ahd/2016 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Page 2 of 6 3

AARK INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in issuing a notice

TRISHULAM CO. OP. HO. SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT (CPC)-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

3 – section as deductor) under section 200, such statement shall be processed in the following manner, namely:— (a) the sums deductible under this Chapter shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely:— (i) any arithmetical error in the statement; or (ii) an incorrect claim, apparent from any information in the statement; (b) the interest, if any, shall be computed

TRISHULAM CO. OP. HO. SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT (CPC)-TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

3 – section as deductor) under section 200, such statement shall be processed in the following manner, namely:— (a) the sums deductible under this Chapter shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely:— (i) any arithmetical error in the statement; or (ii) an incorrect claim, apparent from any information in the statement; (b) the interest, if any, shall be computed