REAL CARGO MUMBAI,ARVALLI vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, MODASA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad. This Appeal In Ita No.268/Ahd/2024 For Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Filed By The Assessee Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Division Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 25.09.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi U/S. 250 Of The Income- Tax Act,1961 , Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1056508501(1), Which Has In Turn Arisen From The Assessment Order Dated 18.12.2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S. 143(3) Read With Section 254 Of The Income-Tax Act 1961. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Reads As Under:-

disallowance in the case the assessee is not the one in default in light of section 201(1) squarely applies in facts of the instant case. The Revenue however opposes this contention by submitting that the second proviso is made applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2013 only. Learned counsel representing assessee at this stage quotes Tribunal’s decision in Rajeev Kumar Agarwal

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

THE ACIT,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

THE ACIT,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowances. The assessee emphasizes compliance with Section 80IA of the Act provisions, such as maintaining separate books of accounts and fulfilling other operational and statutory criteria, positioning itself as a qualifying infrastructure developer. 12.4. The core dispute lies in the interpretation of whether the assessee’s role constitutes infrastructure development or merely a works contract. The Revenue relies

EXPRESS CARGO CARRIERS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2015-16

194C. 4. The learned A.O. as well as Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred while not considering that during the course of appellant proceedings the appellant has already filed the quarterly TDS returns of the year under consideration and the non-filing of TDS returns was a technical breach and the same had been concluded, however

M/S. BINORI INFRACON,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S.Binori Infracon The Dy.Cit Old S.No.319/2, Block No.440 Vs Circle-3(2)(1) Binori Gracia Ahmedabad Opp. Sobo Centre, South Bopal Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) Pan: Aaofb 4823 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Shah, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/06/2024

section 194C of the Act. Consequently, at 30% of the payments amounting to Rs.36,44,817/- were disallowed under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 1 1 , VADODARA, VADODARA vs. NETAFIM IRRIGATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowance by the Assessing Officer is the reference to "Netafim ACS and India Ltd.” on the first page of the agreement. The appellant submitted that the said reference was a typographical error and placed on record various documentary evidences to substantiate that it was in fact the executing party. These included a copy of the agreement signed by the appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 1 1 , VADODARA, VADODARA vs. NETAFIM IRRIGATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

disallowance by the Assessing Officer is the reference to "Netafim ACS and India Ltd.” on the first page of the agreement. The appellant submitted that the said reference was a typographical error and placed on record various documentary evidences to substantiate that it was in fact the executing party. These included a copy of the agreement signed by the appellant