DUSHYANTSINH YADVENDRASINH CHUDASAMA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.353/Ahd/2022 & 354/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively Dushyantsinh Yadvendrasinh The Dy.Commissioner Of बनाम/ Chudasama Income Tax V/S. C/O.Anil R. Shah (Ca), Circle -1 (2) Shreeji House, 4Th Floor Vadodara – 390 007 B/H. M.J. Library Ahmedabad - 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acrpc 1888 M (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

disallowed the entire amount under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the ground that the assessee failed to deduct TDS on these payments, as required under Section 194A

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

section 194A(3)(iii)(b) of the Act, being payment made to financial corporation established by or under a Central, State or Provincial Act. Said companies are established under central act as non banking financial company and its lending activity is governed and regulated by RBI. So there is no liability of tax deduction of finical charges paid to said

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

194A(3) of the Act does not apply in the case of the assessee, Hence, the case of the assessee is clearly covered under the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Therefore, interest expenses amounting to Rs. 97,716/- on which TDS has not been deducted is disallowed

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

194A on receipt of prescribed form, the mischief provided under section 40(a)(ia) is not attracted. 12. We find that no default can be said to have occurred in terms of the phraseology provided under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the facts of the case. Accordingly, we hold that the CIT(A) rightly cancelled the disallowance

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

disallowance U/s. 14A instead of deleting entire disallowance made by AO as appellant had a separate "Investment Division" for which separate books of account were maintained and audited, copies of such accounts were provided to entire AO and appellant had opted to suo moto disallowance the entitle expenditure of that division viz Rs. 1,56,62,600 U/s. 14A while

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

disallowed as per the amended provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. CO No.17/Ahd/2016 (By Assessee) DCIT vs. Arvind Retail Ltd. Asst.Year – 2011-12 Interest Expenses of Rs. 2,32,890/- to Kotak Mahindra prime Limited under section 194A

DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (OSD)-II, RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1499/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Draipl-Mskel(Jv), Income Tax 2Nd Floor, “Msk”, Vs. Officer(Osd)-Ii, Passport Officer To Panjra Pol Road, Range-9, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaaad3825B

disallowed the same under the provisions of section 194A read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Draipl-Kskel (Jv) Ito, Ward-9(2) 2Nd Floor, “Msk” Vs. Ahmedabad. Passport Office To Panjarapole Rd. Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaad 3825 B (Applicant) (Responent)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), the AO observed that interest payments made to SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. included financial charges liable for TDS under section 194A

M/S. BAJAJ FOODS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

section 194A of the Act also. Our attention was drawn to the relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2012-13 , copy of which was placed as Annexure-G before us, as under: 5.2 Decision: I have gone through the facts mentioned in the assessment order and the submission filed by the appellant. My predecessor in appellant

NIMBESHWAR GUDADRAM DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) (PREVIOUSLY CIRCLE-3(3)), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had paid interest of Rs. 41,21,055/- to various Non-Banking Finance Companies such as Cholamandalam, Harison, Hinduja and Tata Motors Finance Ltd., without deducting tax at source under section 194A

M/S. MULCHANDBHAI & SONS,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2371/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Mulchandbhai & Sons, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, B-507, Ganesh Plaza, Ward-3(2)(4), Opp. Navrangpura Bus Stand, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Pan : Aacfm 7364 F [ अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2017 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 13.07.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grievances Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows:-

Section 194A will not be applicable on the income M/s. Mulchandbhai & Sons vs. ITO AY : 2012-13 - 3 – credited or paid by a firm to the partners and therefore, no disallowance

THE BAVLA GROUP SEVA SAHAKAR MANDALI LTD,BAVLA, AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(5), AHMEDABAD, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of claim of deduction for a sum of Rs. 4,01,607/- on interest income earned by the assessee on funds parked with and dividend income earned from the Ahmedabad District Cooperative Bank Ltd. under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. In appeal, Ld. CIT(A) held that interest income and dividend income earned by the assessee

BACKBONE TARMET NG JV,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vs. Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv, The Income-Tax Officer, A-9, Kumud Apartment, Ward-5(2)(2), Near Stadium Five Roads, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aaaab 3885 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent 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 20.06.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Deciding Appeal Ex- Parte Without Appreciating That Business Of The Appellant Has Been Closed Since Covid-19 & Therefore, In Absence Of Any Office, Notice(S) Claimed To Be Have Been Served Through Email Could Not Be Communicated To The Partners Of The Appellant. Without Prejudice To This It Is Submitted That No Notice(S) Came To Be Served On The Appellant At The Designated Email Stated In Form No. 35 For The Purpose Of Service Of Notice(S). Backbone Tarmet Ng Jv Vs. Ito Ay : 2005-06 2

194A on such interest expenses. The AO accordingly invoked the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed

AQUAFIL POLYMERS CO.PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, TDS CIRCLE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

194A ways that tax should be deducted at the time of payment or credit, whichever is earlier, the company firmly believes that when the liability is not certain, there will not arise any liability of TDS. Further, the company has not claimed any expenditure towards interest in the return of income. (UNQUOTE) 4 Again in the post survey inquiry