VIPULKUMAR HEMANTLAL POPAT, UPLETA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 72/Rjt/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 Vipul H. Popat, I.T.O., Prop. Mathav Agro Industri, Vs. Tds-1, Nilkanthkhandskampound, Rajkot. Dhoraji Road, Upleta, Rajkot. C/O D.R Adhia “Om Shri Padamlaya”, Nr. Trikamrayji Haweli, 16-Jagnath Plot, Dr.Yagnik Road, Opp. Imperial Hotel, Rajkot-360001

disallowance was made by the lower authorities on account of non-deduction of TDS under the provisions of section 194C read with section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the own case of the assessee for the same assessment year under consideration in the proceedings carried out under the provisions of section 143(3) of the Act which

M/S. D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

5. Ground No.2 relates to disallowance of Rs. 9,73,33,826/- being export commission paid to non-resident agents, u/s. 40(a)(ia) on the ground of non-deduction of TDS. The case of the Revenue is this that the person making payment to the non-resident would be liable to be deducted tax under Section 194H

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S D.M.L. EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

5. Ground No.2 relates to disallowance of Rs. 9,73,33,826/- being export commission paid to non-resident agents, u/s. 40(a)(ia) on the ground of non-deduction of TDS. The case of the Revenue is this that the person making payment to the non-resident would be liable to be deducted tax under Section 194H

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S DML EXIM PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

5. Ground No.2 relates to disallowance of Rs. 9,73,33,826/- being export commission paid to non-resident agents, u/s. 40(a)(ia) on the ground of non-deduction of TDS. The case of the Revenue is this that the person making payment to the non-resident would be liable to be deducted tax under Section 194H

ASHOKKUMAR PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,PORBANDAR vs. THE PR. CIT, JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appear of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.83/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Ashokkumar Projects India P. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax, 4Th Floor, Manek Centre, P.N. Cholera Arcade, M.G. Road Opposite, Bhaveshwar Mahadev Marg, Jamnagar - 361008 Temple, Porbandar – 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamca5891Q (Assessee) (Respondent)

194C of the Act. But the assessee has failed to deduct TDS on expenses aggregating to Rs. 21,84,141/- and thus violated the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. As such, an amount of Rs.6,55,242/-, being 30% of Rs.21,84,141/- is required to be disallowed under section 40(a) (ia) of the Act.Therefore

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, JUNAGADH vs. M/S KESHODWALA FOODS., VERAVAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1133/Rjt/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08) D.C.I.T, बनाम/ M/S Keshodwala Foods, Circle-1, 305-G.I.D.C. Industrial Vs. Junagadh. Estate, Somnath Road, Veraval. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfk6651Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ranjit Singh Cit. D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 24/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Rajkot [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Dated 16/06/2010, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 08/12/2009 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2007- 08. A.Y. 2007-08 The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

194C of the Act. The assessee paid the charges to Shri Ramjibhai Kanjibhai Cham whereas the bills for the processing charges were raised by M/s Cham trading organization. The assessee in support of its contention for non-deduction of TDS filed two certificates issued under section 197 of the Act for nil deduction dated 05/09/2006 for Rs.50 lakhs and 12/01/2007

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)

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 of Balsara Home Products Ltd. vs ITO (2005) 94 TTJ 970 and decision of Hon’ble Karnataka Supreme court

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. SENOR METALS PVT. LTD., JAMNAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 260/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12

section 43(5). It is immaterial whether transaction is carried out at the recognized stock exchange or not. Even the circular of CBDT cited in the assessment order states that once it is established that the assessee has entered in the transaction of the commodity that they deal the other technical details have no material impact. Hence, this reasoning

THE ITO, WARD 1(3), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S PAVAN CONSTRUCTION CO, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 194C of the Act. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A). Hence, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA Nos.760 & 761/Rjt/2010 And CO No.32 & 33/Rjt/2010 M/s. Pavan Cosnt. Co. A.Ys. 2005-06 & 2006-07 59. The second issue raised by Revenue is that ld CIT(A) erred in deleting

PUNABHAI G. PARDAVA,,DHARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(4),, AMRELI

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

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

194C were indeed applicable and the assessee- appellant was under obligation to deduct the tax at source in relation to the payments made by it for hiring the vehicles for the purpose of its business of transportation of goods; that disallowance under section 40(a)(id) of the Act is not Ltd. only to the amount outstanding and this provision

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

194C of the Act, TDS should have been deducted on aforesaid contract expenses. However, as per Tax Audit Report, 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

M/S MARUTINANDAN CONSTRUCTION,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1(3),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowance of the impugned expenses on account of non-deduction of TDS in view of the amended proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in a situation where the recipient has disclosed the amount received from the assessee in his books and offered the same to tax. 5. On the other hand the learned DR vehemently supported

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)

5. Alternatively from the balance of Rs.1201670 not accepted by the ld.CIT(A) who him self admitted that entred receipt cannot be tax. Therefore, 8% this Rs.1201670 may kindly be directed to be added and balance may be directed to be reduced.” 11. On the other hand, the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below

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

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

5 raised by the Revenue reads as under: The Ld.CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in deleting Rs.36,61,656/- made by AO on account of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) freight expenses. 30. Briefly stated the disallowance pertained to transportation/freight charges of Rs.36,61,656/- paid/credited by the assessee without deduction of tax at source

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR. TDS,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.628/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.375/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 M/S. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 202, Arpan Complex, Opp. Vs. Tds Circle, Swaminarayan Mandir, Rajkot. Kalavad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Aabcc8197Q

194C of the Act. All the payments to the laborers are supported with the vouchers. ITA nos.628-375/Rjt/2014-2015 Asstt. Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 7 4.1 The assessee has been making the payments to the individual laborers without deducting the TDS consistently. There was no disallowance made even in the assessment framed under section

THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.628/Rjt/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.375/Rjt/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 M/S. Classic Network Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 202, Arpan Complex, Opp. Vs. Tds Circle, Swaminarayan Mandir, Rajkot. Kalavad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Aabcc8197Q

194C of the Act. All the payments to the laborers are supported with the vouchers. ITA nos.628-375/Rjt/2014-2015 Asstt. Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 7 4.1 The assessee has been making the payments to the individual laborers without deducting the TDS consistently. There was no disallowance made even in the assessment framed under section

JAYSHRI SILK PROCESSING MILLS P. LTD.,,JETPUR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.170-172/Rjt/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Jayshri Silk Processing Mills A.C.I.T, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1, Vs. Pedhla, Rajkot. Jetpur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabfj5033F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 18/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 17/03/2017, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S.153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10. Ita Nos.170-172/Rjt/2017 A.Y.S 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10 At The Outset, We Note That The Assessee Has Filed The Adjournment Application But We Rejected The Same As The Issue Was Covered. Hence, We Proceed To Hear The Appeal Ex-Party Qua The Assessee.

194C of the Act which reads as under: 14[Payments to contractors. 15194C. (1) Any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident (hereafter in this section referred to as the contractor 16) for carrying out any work 16 (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and a specified

JAYSHRI SILK PROCESSING MILLS P. LTD.,,JETPUR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.170-172/Rjt/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Jayshri Silk Processing Mills A.C.I.T, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1, Vs. Pedhla, Rajkot. Jetpur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabfj5033F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 18/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 17/03/2017, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S.153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10. Ita Nos.170-172/Rjt/2017 A.Y.S 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10 At The Outset, We Note That The Assessee Has Filed The Adjournment Application But We Rejected The Same As The Issue Was Covered. Hence, We Proceed To Hear The Appeal Ex-Party Qua The Assessee.

194C of the Act which reads as under: 14[Payments to contractors. 15194C. (1) Any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident (hereafter in this section referred to as the contractor 16) for carrying out any work 16 (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and a specified