M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

7 Friends Salt Works & Allied Industry vs. DCIT (TDS) deduct tax on such payment u/s 194J of the Ac. The assessee has as such deducted TDS @ 2% u/s 194C is not maintainable therefore I confirm the action of the assessing officer to levy short deduction of tax as required u/s 194J of the Act as under F.Y. 2013-14 Amount

M/S. FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALIED INDUSTRIES,,GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE , RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

7 Friends Salt Works & Allied Industry vs. DCIT (TDS) deduct tax on such payment u/s 194J of the Ac. The assessee has as such deducted TDS @ 2% u/s 194C is not maintainable therefore I confirm the action of the assessing officer to levy short deduction of tax as required u/s 194J of the Act as under F.Y. 2013-14 Amount

ITO WARD 3(1)(4), RAJKOT-STATION- AMRELI, AMRELI, GUJARAT vs. AVADH AGRI EXPORTS, AMRELI, GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

TDS is confined to payments made to any "resident". On the other hand, section 172 operates in the area of computation of profits from shipping business of non-residents. Thus, there is no overlapping in the areas of operation of these sections. There would, however, be cases where payments are made to shipping agents of non-resident ship-owners

AMITSINH NANABHA RANA,,WANKANER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, MORBI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2012-13 Amitsinh Nababha Rana Ito, Ward-1 At. Divijay Nagar Vs Morbi. Wankaner. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

7 outsourcing basis. Before reaching to the conclusion that the assessee failed to deduct the TDS under the provisions of section 194C

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and we hold that Ld

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

TDS u/s. 194C or u/s. 194J. 6. Section 194C contemplate: 194C. (1) Any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident (hereafter in this section referred to as the contractor85) for carrying out any work (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and a specified person shall

THE DCIT, CIRCLE TDS,, RAJKOT vs. M\S. APRICOT FOODS PVT. LTD. , METODA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

194C will not be applicable. Respectfully following the above decision, Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed. 7. Regarding Ground No. 2 namely various discounts given by the assessee is to be treated in the nature of commission, Section 194H applicable. The word 'commission or brokerage' is defined in section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE (TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. M/S. GOPAL SNACKS P. LTD., RAJKOT, VILLAGE METODA, TAL. LODHIKA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

TDS has been fixed upon the assessee in any of the other years. In assessment u/s 143(3) also no disallowance has been made u/s 40(a)(la). I also find merit in reliance of assessee on decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in case of Girnar Food and beverages (supra), Decision of Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad in case

SHRI JAY KHODIYAR MAJOOR S M LTD.,AT CHHALANKA, TAL. VISAVADAR, DIST. JUNAGADH vs. THE PR. CIT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee dismissed

Bench: Hri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS had not been deducted by the assessee. Therefore, in view of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% of the contract expenses should have been disallowed on account of non-deduction of tax at source. However, the assessee did not file any response to the aforesaid notice and accordingly, the Ld. PCIT set-aside the assessment order

GOJIYA BHIKHUBHAI,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

7) observes\n\"4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of\nsubstantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in\ninjustice being done because of a non- deliberate delay.”\nWhen we weigh these two aspects then the side of justice becomes heavier and\ncasts a duty

SHREE SAMARTH SWITCHGEAR AND TRANSMISSION PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

7 9.The relevant material facts, as culled out from the material on record, are as follows.The assessee has filed return of income for assessment year(AY) 2018- 19, on 30/10/2018, declaring total income of Rs.71,57,260/-, for the year under consideration. The assessee`s case was selected for complete scrutiny, as in the case of assessee, a survey

SHREE SAMARTH ELECTRICALS PVT LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

7 9.The relevant material facts, as culled out from the material on record, are as follows.The assessee has filed return of income for assessment year(AY) 2018- 19, on 30/10/2018, declaring total income of Rs.71,57,260/-, for the year under consideration. The assessee`s case was selected for complete scrutiny, as in the case of assessee, a survey

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. DCIT-ACIT CENT-2 RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

TDS u/s. 194C has been duly deducted on all such charges paid to Shiv Shipping and other handling agents. In support of its claim, the appellant has also furnished the copy of sample agreement entered into with the above said handling agents. 36. Further, the appellant has also furnished the summary of the aforesaid agreements pertaining to three different

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT vs. ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (SWISS SINGAPORE INDIA PVT. LTD., GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

TDS u/s. 194C has been duly deducted on all such charges paid to Shiv Shipping and other handling agents. In support of its claim, the appellant has also furnished the copy of sample agreement entered into with the above said handling agents. 36. Further, the appellant has also furnished the summary of the aforesaid agreements pertaining to three different

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 , RAJKOT vs. ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING(INDIA) PVT.LTD. (SWISS SINGAPORE INDIA PVT. LTD.), GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

TDS u/s. 194C has been duly deducted on all such charges paid to Shiv Shipping and other handling agents. In support of its claim, the appellant has also furnished the copy of sample agreement entered into with the above said handling agents. 36. Further, the appellant has also furnished the summary of the aforesaid agreements pertaining to three different

ADITYA BIRLA GLOBAL TRADING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,GUJARAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, GANDHIHDAM, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

TDS u/s. 194C has been duly deducted on all such charges paid to Shiv Shipping and other handling agents. In support of its claim, the appellant has also furnished the copy of sample agreement entered into with the above said handling agents. 36. Further, the appellant has also furnished the summary of the aforesaid agreements pertaining to three different

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 194C(6) of the Act is not applicable in respect of such payment provided there is less than 10 Trucks and in these circumstances, there is no need to deduct TDS, however, the assessee needs to file declaration to that effect before the assessing officer. That is, the assessee needs to file only declaration, stating that he has less

SHRI VIJAYDAN KISHORDAN GADHAVI,BHUJ KUTCH vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE(TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 194C(6) of the Act is not applicable in respect of such payment provided there is less than 10 Trucks and in these circumstances, there is no need to deduct TDS, however, the assessee needs to file declaration to that effect before the assessing officer. That is, the assessee needs to file only declaration, stating that he has less

THE ASSISTANT COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,, JAMNAGAR vs. SHRI MILANKUMAR M. POBARU,, JAMNAGAR

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

7 Shri Milankumar M. Pobaru vs. ACIT 16. Ground no. 3 raised by the Revenue reads as under: 3.The Ld.CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in deleting Rs.9,28,106 /- made by AO on account of disallowance u/s 14A . 17. The issue relates to disallowance of expenses incurred for the purposes of earning incomes exempt from