SHREE HARI ENTERPRISE ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nfollowing terms:\n\ni) Issue No

section 194-I was deducted only on payment of Rs.6,00,000/-.\n\n9. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated the issue to have been adjudicated during the assessment proceedings. In this regard, he drew our attention to the reply filed to the ld.Pr.CIT placed before us\n\nat PB Page No.598 and 599, the contents of which are reproduced

OM YASH PROJECTS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.40/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2023-24 Om Yash Projects Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Office No. 1113, Aaron Spectra, बनाम/ Ward-3(1)(1), V/S. Rajpath Rangoli Road, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aacco4734C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kaushik Kejriwal & Ms. Kushboo Shah, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Additional / Joint From The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], Dated 26.11.2024, In Connection With The Intimation Under Section 143(1) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2023-24, Issued By The Centralized Processing Center (Cpc), Bangalore, Dated 09.01.2024. Om Yash Projects Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2023-24

87,23,656/- The assessee claimed TDS credit of Rs. 2,46,82,297/-, reflecting the deduction made by government authorities. The CPC, Bangalore processed the return under section

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 40(a)(i) in relation to foreign commission of Rs. 1,73,87,137 on the ground that the assessee has not deducted TDS

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 40(a)(i) in relation to foreign commission of Rs. 1,73,87,137 on the ground that the assessee has not deducted TDS

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 40(a)(i) in relation to foreign commission of Rs. 1,73,87,137 on the ground that the assessee has not deducted TDS

GLOBE TEXTILES (INDIA) P. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 40(a)(i) in relation to foreign commission of Rs. 1,73,87,137 on the ground that the assessee has not deducted TDS

THE JT. CIT (OSD) KHEDA RANGE, NADIAD vs. ADF FOODS LIMITED, NADIAD

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee as well as one appeal filed by the Revenue are set aside to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the matters as per law

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

87,905/- invoking section 40(a)(i) for non-deductiori of TDS u/s. 195 r.w. Explanation 2 of the Act without

ADF FOODS LTD.,,NADIAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KHEDA CIRCLE,, NADIAD

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee as well as one appeal filed by the Revenue are set aside to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the matters as per law

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

87,905/- invoking section 40(a)(i) for non-deductiori of TDS u/s. 195 r.w. Explanation 2 of the Act without

ADF FOODS LTD.,,NADIAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KHEDA CIRCLE,, NADIAD

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee as well as one appeal filed by the Revenue are set aside to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the matters as per law

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

87,905/- invoking section 40(a)(i) for non-deductiori of TDS u/s. 195 r.w. Explanation 2 of the Act without

ADF FOODS LTD.,,NADIAD vs. THE DCIT, KHEDA CIRCLE, NADIAD

In the result, all three appeals filed by the assessee as well as one appeal filed by the Revenue are set aside to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide the matters as per law

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

87,905/- invoking section 40(a)(i) for non-deductiori of TDS u/s. 195 r.w. Explanation 2 of the Act without

SUZLON GUJARAT WIND PARK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the above\nterms

TDS credit of ₹1,11,297/- was allowed by the\nDepartment, and refund was accordingly issued vide rectification order\nunder section 154 dated 22.07.2020. The refund and interest granted under\nsection 244A totalled to ₹11,81,47,067/-, comprising refund of\n₹10,93,89,770/- and interest of ₹87

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT MICROWAX LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS u/s 195 nor the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is attracted. Regarding genuineness of commission-payment, we observe that the assessee has given sufficient documentary evidences to prove the services of Page 41 of 51 ITA No.2682 & 2683/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. agents and payment of commission. It is also observed that

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT MICROWAX LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS u/s 195 nor the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is attracted. Regarding genuineness of commission-payment, we observe that the assessee has given sufficient documentary evidences to prove the services of Page 41 of 51 ITA No.2682 & 2683/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. agents and payment of commission. It is also observed that

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS certificates issued by Tax deductor i.e. Municipal Corporation, Irrigation Department, Road & Building Division, Salinity Control Division wherein the nature of work shown as contract and tax deducted under Section 194C of the Act which proves that the assessee company is a “Contractor” and not as a “Owner” of the project/enterprises. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee company

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. M/S. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS certificates issued by Tax deductor i.e. Municipal Corporation, Irrigation Department, Road & Building Division, Salinity Control Division wherein the nature of work shown as contract and tax deducted under Section 194C of the Act which proves that the assessee company is a “Contractor” and not as a “Owner” of the project/enterprises. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee company

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS certificates issued by Tax deductor i.e. Municipal Corporation, Irrigation Department, Road & Building Division, Salinity Control Division wherein the nature of work shown as contract and tax deducted under Section 194C of the Act which proves that the assessee company is a “Contractor” and not as a “Owner” of the project/enterprises. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee company

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. M/S. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS certificates issued by Tax deductor i.e. Municipal Corporation, Irrigation Department, Road & Building Division, Salinity Control Division wherein the nature of work shown as contract and tax deducted under Section 194C of the Act which proves that the assessee company is a “Contractor” and not as a “Owner” of the project/enterprises. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee company

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS certificates issued by Tax deductor i.e. Municipal Corporation, Irrigation Department, Road & Building Division, Salinity Control Division wherein the nature of work shown as contract and tax deducted under Section 194C of the Act which proves that the assessee company is a “Contractor” and not as a “Owner” of the project/enterprises. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee company