SHRI MAHENDRA S. GAJJAR,NARMADA vs. DCIT, BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Meena

TDS on these payments under section 194C of the Act and pay the same to the Central Government account as per time prescribed under section 200 (1) of the Act. Therefore, these expenses were disallowed under the provisions of section 40

M/S. K.N. DIAMOND,,BILIMORA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVSARI CIRCLE,, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1788/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S K.N.Diamond, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Soniwad, Bilimora, Of Income Tax, Navsari Navsari – 396 321. Circle, Navsari. [Pan: Aadfk 3167 H] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Parimalsinh Parmar – Advocate राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr

TDS provisions, the assessee can be declared in default under section 201 of the Act no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR ROSHAN,,SILVASSA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA WARD,, VAPI

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.3153/Ahd/2016/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2007-08 Shri Vijay Kumar Roshan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 4-First Floor, Shreeji Ward, Silvasa Apartment Kilavani, Naka Silvasa Pan: Aempr 1339 H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

TDS under section 194C on payments made to 6 sub- contractors amounting to Rs. 61,02,981. Therefore, the AO disallowed the said payments under section 40

SURAT DISTRICT CO.OP.MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD.,,SURAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(2),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) The Surat District Co-Op. Dy. Commissioner Of Milk Producer’S Union Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Vs Sumul Dairy Road, Station Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Road, Surat Gate, Surat Pan : Aaaas 3450 M Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct the tax at source under section 194-I of the Act. To support his submission, the assessee relied on the decision of Koley Construction vs. ITO (2017) 86 taxmann.com 73 (Kol) and RBL Bank Ltd. vs. ITSO (TDS

SHRI AYUSH MURALILAL AGARWAL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2622/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Ayush Murarilal Agarwal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Brijvilla Bunglow, Brijwasi Estate, Ward-1(3)(1) Surat B/H Gokul Row House, Parley Point Surat 395 007 [Pan: Acypa 9649 K] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala - Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri B. P. K. Panda, Sr. D.R.

TDS under section 194C on labour expenses of Rs.4,90,232 on which the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source @1%. Therefore, said amount is liable to be disallowed under section 40

ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), SURAT vs. M/S. SATYAM ENTERPRISE, SURAT

In the result, this part of issue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) I.T.O., M/S Satyam Enterprise, Ward- 3(3)(4), 182-Thakordwar Society, Nr. Vs. Surat. Spinning Mill, Varachha Road, Surat. Pan No. Abvfs 5076 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, on account of assessee's failure to deduct TDS on Labour Contract Expenses, by observing that the amount of receipts was shown by the respective Sub Contractors in their ROI, without considering the fact that the assessee had not adhered to all the conditions of first proviso of Section

THE UDHNA CITIZEN CO OPP. BANK LIMITED ,NOW MERGE WITH KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO.OP. BANK LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. I.T.O TDS -2 , SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Narendra Prasad Sinha

TDS as stipulated u/s.201(1) of the Act. The provisions of section 40(a)(ia) and section 201(1) operate

N R CORPORATION,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.526/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 (Physical Hearing) N. R. Corporation, Vs. The Pcit - 1, B-202, Capital Status, Opp – Hariom Surat Nagar, Near Atman Park, L. P. Savani Road, Adajan, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aamfn9368A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025

TDS in contravention of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, the ld. PCIT concluded that AO passed

SHREE CHEMOPHARMA ANKLESHWAR PVT. LTD.,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.351/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shree Chemopharma Ankleshwar Vs. The Acit, Circle-2, Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch. 313/13, Gidc Industrial Estate, Ankleshwar -393002, Dist. Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafcs4782F (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mukund Rao, Ar Revenue By : Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/01/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A)-Vadodara-3/10473/2015-16 Dated 29.01.2018, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”], Dated 27.02.2015. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: 1. The Addition Made On Account Of Research Fees Disallowed U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 Of Rs.18,30,358/-. Without Prejudice To The Above Applicant Reserves Its Right To Make Any Amendment To The Grounds Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing Be Deleted.” 3. At The Outset, Learned Counsel Submitted That Payee Has Included Receipts Of Rs.18,30,358/- In His Books Of Accounts & Paid The Taxes Thereon. Therefore

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is curative amendment and has retrospective effect from 01/04/2005. From the above precedent, we find that the Amendment has come into effect with retrospective date and as per the amended provision if the payee has included the receipt in its books of account and has offered for taxes then the disallowance on account

ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL CO. PVT LTD,SURAT vs. PCIT-1, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.541/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Engineering Professional Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit -1, 444, Royal Arcade, Opp. Sarthana Zoo, Surat Varachha Road, Near Sarthana Jakatnaka, Surat – 395006, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabce0313Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/02/2025

TDS attracts provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and 30% of Rs.31,11,76,823/- was required

SHIVA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY AGENCY GUJARAT PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2),, SURAT

In the result, ITA No.2527/Ahd/2017 is allowed, and ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 12. It emerges out from the record that the assessee has made payment of interest to non-banking financial companies viz. Sundaram Finance and Shriram Finance. It failed to deduct TDS

SHIVA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY AGENCY GUJARAT PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, ITA No.2527/Ahd/2017 is allowed, and ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 12. It emerges out from the record that the assessee has made payment of interest to non-banking financial companies viz. Sundaram Finance and Shriram Finance. It failed to deduct TDS

THE ITO, WARD-1,, NA vs. ARIVS.SHRI ANILKUMAR AMRUTLAL CHAHWALA, NAVSARI

In the result, this ground of appeal is rejected

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2078/Ahd/2010 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1003/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Amrutlal Chahwala, Ward-(1), Navsari. 102, Trimurti Complex, Vijalpore, Navsari. [Pan: Abnpc 6308 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

section 40(a)(ia). The Assessing Officer disallowed the payment to labour contractor exceeding Rs.50,000/- without remitting TDS. The assessing

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) D.C.I.T. M/S J.K. Paper Ltd. Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mill, Vs. Surat. Fort Songadh, Surat. Pan : Aaact 6305 N Appellant Respondednt

Section 40(a)(ia) was deleted by CIT(A) by holding that the disallowance is made solely for not making TDS

JAVAHARLAL S DHARIWAL,SURAT vs. ITO WARD 1(2)(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.203/Srt/2020 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Javaharlal S Dhariwal Income Tax Officer, 886 Old Gidc, Nr. Bank Of Ward-1(2)(2), Surat-395001 Vs Baroda, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Pan No: Aaypd 4207 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mahul Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 28.04.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [For Short To As “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 30.01.2020 For Assessment Year 2013- 14, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Income-Tax Officer-Ward-1(2)(2), Surat/Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making A Disallowance Of Rs.3,45,378/- U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. Javaharlal S Dhariwal 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Partly Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer By Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs.2,46,915/- Out Of Total Disallowance Of Rs.4,93,830/- On Account Of Machinery Salary Expenses. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.3,95,466/- Being Interest Expenses Claimed U/S 57 Of The Act.

TDS) as required under section 194C 2 Javaharlal S Dhariwal r.w.s. 194A of the Act. The assessee was given show cause by the assessing officer as to such expenses may not be disallowed. The assessing officer recorded that no response was made nor any detailed like PAN, or addresses of the parties were furnished. The Assessing Officer in absence

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT vs. AKANSHA SHIP BREAKING PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.112/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Akansha Ship Breaking Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Dhamanwal Complex, Opp. Surat. Rajkumar Theater, Udhna, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacca2307F (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Vijayvargia, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sita Ram Meena, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Surat-1/10577/2016-17 Dated 14.02.2020, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”], Dated 28.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.39,52,119/- Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act On Account Of Non-Deduction Of Tds, According To The Provisions Of Section 194H Of The Act, On Bank Guarantee Commission Charged By The Bank On Behalf Of Assessee For The Line Of Credit Facility Extended By It, Holding That The Payment Made To The Bank In The Nature Of Commission For Extending The Line Of Credit Facility Is Not In The Nature Of Commission & Therefore The Provisions Of Section 194H Are Not Applicable To Such Payments, Without Appreciating That In The Assessee'S Case The Bank Charge Has The Character Of Commission?

section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act on account of non-deduction of TDS, according to the provisions of section

STATE BANK OF INDIA,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-3, NAVSARI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.37 & 38/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtualcourt Hearing) State Bank Of India Income Tax Officer (Tds-3) Room No.607, Aaykar Regional Business Office-V, Navsari- Vs. Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- Tapi, 1St Floor, Shourya Apartment, 395001 Opp. Lunsikul Ground, Navsari- 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacs 8577 K (Appellant ) (Respondent)

TDS-3 erred in passing an order under section 201(1) /201(1A) and in raising demand of Rs. 2,40

LITECON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.220/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Litecon Industries Pvt. Ltd. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Surat, 1, 123, 1St Floor, Aaykar Block No.255, Navi Pardi, B/H Vs. Kamrej Sugar, Joy N Joy Road, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395002 Kamrej, Surat-394150 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcl 8007 A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""थ" / Respondent

TDS on expenditure to the tune of Rs.2,35,66,362/- made on account of contract payments in the following cases, which is in contravention to the provisions of Section 40