THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. ASCENDUM SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

TDS under law, such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee's profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40

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)

TDS Circle 5 . A.Y. 2012-13 in time. Accordingly, the amount of Rs. 26,68,187/- being transportation charges paid/credited in the above mentioned account without complying the provisions of section 194C of the Income-tax Act and without complying the provisions of Section 194C(7) of the Act, is disallowed u/s. 40

ARVIND LIFESTYLE BRANDS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1817/Ahd/2016 2012-13 Arvind Lifestyle Brands D.C.I.T, Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), Arvind Mills Premises, Ahmedabad. Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025. Pan No. Aaach7252A 2. 2056/Ahd/2016 2012-13 D.C.I.T, Arvind Lifestyle Circle-1(1)(2), Brands Ltd., Ahmedabad. 3. 2377/Ahd/2017 2013-14 Arvind Lifestyle Brands D.C.I.T, Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad. 4. 2618/Ahd/2017 2014-15 Arvind Lifestyle Brands Ito Ward-1(1)(3) Ltd., Ahmedabad

TDS as provided under section 40(a)(i) and 40(a)(ia) of the Act. However, the AO disagreed with

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2970/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T., M/S Deloitee Haskins & Sells, Circle-1(2), Vs. 31-Nutan Bharat Society, Vadodara. Alkapuri, Baroda.

TDS as specified under section 194-I of the Act. A.Y. 2014-2015 13 15.5 In the backdrop of the above stated discussion, the 1st question arises for our adjudication with respect to the banquet charges paid by the assessee amounting to ₹ 60,51,027/-, in this connection we note that the provisions of section 40

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ARVIND RETAIL LTD. ( SINCE MERGED WITH ARVIND LIFESTYLE BRANDS LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, though the alleged amendment in the statute was not applicable for the year under consideration. 8.1. During the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the AO that the assessee has claimed certain expenses without deducting the TDS

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BAJAJ HERBALS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is, thus, allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS. According to the Ld. AO the case made out by the assessee that the Freight Expenses pertain to payments made to agent of foreign shipping companies and, therefore, Section 194C(6) is applicable was not found acceptable by the Ld. AO. Finally relying on Section 40

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. AMOL DICALITE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 539/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1246/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, Amol Dicalite Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 301, Akshay, 53, Ahmedabad Shirmali Society Navrangpura, Ahmedabad

TDS under section 195 read with section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 18. At the outset, we note that

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AMOL DICALITE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 539/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1246/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, Amol Dicalite Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 301, Akshay, 53, Ahmedabad Shirmali Society Navrangpura, Ahmedabad

TDS under section 195 read with section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 18. At the outset, we note that

THE ITO-WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. HIPOLIN LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 40(a)(ia) for non- deduction of TDS on payment made to Marketing Agencies towards sales promotion expenses. 2. On the facts

HIPOLIN LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 40(a)(ia) for non- deduction of TDS on payment made to Marketing Agencies towards sales promotion expenses. 2. On the facts

GLOBAL FABRICS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2012-13

TDS on receipt of specific information from the payees/contractors. Therefore, in the absence of any liability to deduct tax at source under section 194C of the Act, provisions of section 40

THE ITO,PATAN WARD-3,, MEHSANA vs. M/S. SIDDHI VINAYAK TRANSPORT, MEHSANA

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2008-09

TDS was deducted; and that therefore, the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are applicable

SANGHVI FORGING & ENGG.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, assessee s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was made by the Assessing Officer due to the reason that the assessee has failed to deduct the TDS

ITO, WARD-1, PALANPUR, PALANPUR vs. GELOT AGRI EXPORTS, PALANPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

TDS ,in terms of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee was noted to have made

GELOT AGRI EXPORTS,DEESA vs. ITO WD 1 PALANPUR, BANASKANTHA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-1 Vs. Gelot Agri Exports Palanpur, Banaskantha At 13, Aditya Complex Gujarat. Opp: Jalaram Temple Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gelot Agri Exports Vs. Ito, Ward-1 At 13, Aditya Complex Palanpur, Banaskantha Opp: Jalaram Temple Gujarat. Deesa 385 535. Pan : Aapfg 5455 N

TDS ,in terms of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee was noted to have made

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS on such payments would, therefore, be deductible under Section 194J of the Act.” In view of the above we hold that there was no obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source. Consequently, the provisions of Section 40

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), , AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD.(ON BEHALF OF AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Wassem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2021/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ (On Behalf Of Amalgamating Cricle-1(3), Vs. 1St Floor, B-109, Company, Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.) Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Nr. 801-804, 8Th Floor, Abhishree Panjrapole, Ambawadi, Avenue, Opp. Hanumanji Ahmedabad-380015 Temple, Nehrunagar, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce9421H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS on such payments would, therefore, be deductible under Section 194J of the Act.” In view of the above we hold that there was no obligation on the part of the assessee to deduct tax at source. Consequently, the provisions of Section 40

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal I.T

section 40(a)(ia) of the act theses expenditure required to be disallowed for not deducting tax at source. The assessee explained that no TDS

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD.,, BARODA

In the result, appeal I.T

section 40(a)(ia) of the act theses expenditure required to be disallowed for not deducting tax at source. The assessee explained that no TDS