ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

14A and the consequent addition under section 115JB are directed to be deleted. Grounds 2(a) to 2(d) are allowed. Ground No. 3(a) & 3(b): Disallowance of deduction under section 35(2AB) and alternate claim under section 35(1)(iv) 26. During the assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2017–18, the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

14A r.w.r. 8D of the IT Rules, cannot be applied to the provision of Sec. 115JB of the Act as per the direction of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jayshree Tea Industries Ltd. (Supra). 124.5 Now the question arises to determine the disallowance as per the clause (f) to Explanation

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

14A r.w.r. 8D of the IT Rules, cannot be applied to the provision of Sec. 115JB of the Act as per the direction of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jayshree Tea Industries Ltd. (Supra). 124.5 Now the question arises to determine the disallowance as per the clause (f) to Explanation

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

14A of the Act is allowed. ITA Nos.142&143/Ahd/2024 & 48&49/Ahd/2024 Axis Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT & ACIT vs. Axis Bank Ltd. Asst.Years –2010-11 & 2011-12 - 9– Now we shall come to Department’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 15. The sole/single issue for consideration is regarding the disallowance of ESOP expenses, which was allowed

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. AXIS BANK LIMITED, ELLISBRIDGE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

14A of the Act is allowed. ITA Nos.142&143/Ahd/2024 & 48&49/Ahd/2024 Axis Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT & ACIT vs. Axis Bank Ltd. Asst.Years –2010-11 & 2011-12 - 9– Now we shall come to Department’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 15. The sole/single issue for consideration is regarding the disallowance of ESOP expenses, which was allowed

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. AXIS BANK LTD, ELISBRIDGE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

14A of the Act is allowed. ITA Nos.142&143/Ahd/2024 & 48&49/Ahd/2024 Axis Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT & ACIT vs. Axis Bank Ltd. Asst.Years –2010-11 & 2011-12 - 9– Now we shall come to Department’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 15. The sole/single issue for consideration is regarding the disallowance of ESOP expenses, which was allowed

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

14A of the Act is allowed. ITA Nos.142&143/Ahd/2024 & 48&49/Ahd/2024 Axis Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT & ACIT vs. Axis Bank Ltd. Asst.Years –2010-11 & 2011-12 - 9– Now we shall come to Department’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 15. The sole/single issue for consideration is regarding the disallowance of ESOP expenses, which was allowed

SHRI DINESH MILLS LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE -2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 14A read with rule 8D of Income Tax Rule in the own case of the assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No.77/ AHD/2014, wherein it was held as under: ITA No.781/Ahd/2016 & 3 others Shree Dinesh Mills Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT (cross-appeals) Asst.Years – 2012-13 & 2013-14 “14. So far ground with regard to deleting

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD),, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LTD.,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s both appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS claim was also made and the refund claim was also increased. Further, the assessee submitted an explanation vide letter dated 31.07.2013 to the authorities. According to the Learned AO since the assessee has not filed the revised return of income, the plea of the assessee was not sustainable. Further that, instead of the AO the Learned JCIT was informed

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LTD.,-GPCL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JCIT, GANDHINAGAR RANGE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s both appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS claim was also made and the refund claim was also increased. Further, the assessee submitted an explanation vide letter dated 31.07.2013 to the authorities. According to the Learned AO since the assessee has not filed the revised return of income, the plea of the assessee was not sustainable. Further that, instead of the AO the Learned JCIT was informed

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LTD. - GPCL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JCIT, GANDHINAGAR RANGE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s both appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

TDS claim was also made and the refund claim was also increased. Further, the assessee submitted an explanation vide letter dated 31.07.2013 to the authorities. According to the Learned AO since the assessee has not filed the revised return of income, the plea of the assessee was not sustainable. Further that, instead of the AO the Learned JCIT was informed

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 14A for A.Y. 2012-13 is deleted entirely. Following the consistent application ITA Nos.960/Ahd/2016, 1186/Ahd/2016, 2275/Ahd/2017, 2276/Ahd/2017 & 1744//Ahd/2019 Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Asst. Years : 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 of judicial principles established by higher courts, the revenue’s ground is dismissed. Ground No. 2 of revenue

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 14A for A.Y. 2012-13 is deleted entirely. Following the consistent application ITA Nos.960/Ahd/2016, 1186/Ahd/2016, 2275/Ahd/2017, 2276/Ahd/2017 & 1744//Ahd/2019 Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Asst. Years : 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 of judicial principles established by higher courts, the revenue’s ground is dismissed. Ground No. 2 of revenue

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 14A for A.Y. 2012-13 is deleted entirely. Following the consistent application ITA Nos.960/Ahd/2016, 1186/Ahd/2016, 2275/Ahd/2017, 2276/Ahd/2017 & 1744//Ahd/2019 Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Asst. Years : 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 of judicial principles established by higher courts, the revenue’s ground is dismissed. Ground No. 2 of revenue

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 14A for A.Y. 2012-13 is deleted entirely. Following the consistent application ITA Nos.960/Ahd/2016, 1186/Ahd/2016, 2275/Ahd/2017, 2276/Ahd/2017 & 1744//Ahd/2019 Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Asst. Years : 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 of judicial principles established by higher courts, the revenue’s ground is dismissed. Ground No. 2 of revenue

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 14A for A.Y. 2012-13 is deleted entirely. Following the consistent application ITA Nos.960/Ahd/2016, 1186/Ahd/2016, 2275/Ahd/2017, 2276/Ahd/2017 & 1744//Ahd/2019 Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Asst. Years : 2012-13, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 of judicial principles established by higher courts, the revenue’s ground is dismissed. Ground No. 2 of revenue

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

TDS as per section 194H on payment in the nature of Sub brokerage/Commission. 7.The CIT(A) has erred in law and, on facts by directing to treat profit from sale of shares held only up to 30 days as business income and the balance as Capital gains disregarding the findings in the assessment order which reveals that the profit

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

TDS as per section 194H on payment in the nature of Sub brokerage/Commission. 7.The CIT(A) has erred in law and, on facts by directing to treat profit from sale of shares held only up to 30 days as business income and the balance as Capital gains disregarding the findings in the assessment order which reveals that the profit