THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT MICROWAX LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS u/s 195 nor the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is attracted. Regarding genuineness of commission-payment, we observe that the assessee has given sufficient documentary evidences to prove the services of Page 41 of 51 ITA No.2682 & 2683/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. agents and payment of commission. It is also observed that

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT MICROWAX LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both of the Appeals of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

TDS u/s 195 nor the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) is attracted. Regarding genuineness of commission-payment, we observe that the assessee has given sufficient documentary evidences to prove the services of Page 41 of 51 ITA No.2682 & 2683/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. agents and payment of commission. It is also observed that

HESTER BIOSCIENCE LIMITED,MEHSANA vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) on 10.09.2022, wherein the Assessing Officer (A.O.) accepted the income as returned, without making any adjustments or disallowances. Upon examination of the records, the Principal Commissioner noted two key issues that rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst. Commissioner Of M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax, Corporate House, S.G. Highway, Central Circle 2(3), Nr. Sola Bridge, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380 054 [Pan : Aaaci 5120 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit (Dr) Respondent Represented By: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble:-

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds:- “1) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the upward adjustment

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. M/S. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE ACIT., PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. M/S. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE ACIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE ACIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. M/S. RANJIT BUILDCON LTD.,, UNJHA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

240/-. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 31.03.2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19.08.2009 which was served upon the assessee on 26.08.2009. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued on 08.09.2010 which was served upon

TOSHIBA TECHNICAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. THE ADIT.,(INTL.TAXN.)-2, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Miss Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year :2015-16 Toshiba Technical Services Vs. Acit, International International Corporation Taxation-2 (India Project Office) Ahmedabad. B-/12 Vijay Wadi Niwas Chs Ltd. Lokmanya Tilak Road Mulund East, Mumbai Pan : Aabct 9577 D

240 based on the directions received from Hon'ble DRP upholding the adjustment to the transfer price proposed by the learned Transfer Pricing Officer ("TPO"). 2. Transfer Pricing:- 2.1 Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO/ TPO erred in proposing and the Hon'ble DRP further erred in upholding an adjustment

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

240/- under normal provisions and book profit of Rs.724,71,13,583/- under section 115JB of the Act. The return of income was selected for scrutiny under the Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was duly issued. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) along with detailed questionnaires were issued from time

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

240/- under normal provisions and book profit of Rs.724,71,13,583/- under section 115JB of the Act. The return of income was selected for scrutiny under the Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was duly issued. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) along with detailed questionnaires were issued from time

SOPHOS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

240/- and paid the additional tax on the said income. 3. In the meanwhile, the return was taken for scrutiny assessment. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee requested for refund of excess Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) paid by it contending that the rate of DDT paid on the dividends remitted to the shareholders (residents of United Kingdom), should

KAILASH NARAYAN SHRIDHAR,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY CIT CIRCLE 4(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

sections 234B and 234C aggregating to Rs.47,585/- was also levied\nas against Rs.2,490/- shown by the assessee. Against total taxes paid of\nRs.37,55,014/- (advance tax Rs.4,00,000/-, TDS Rs.29,42,544/- self-\nassessment tax Rs.4,12,470/-), CPC determined net refund of Rs.1,153/-\nas against refund of Rs.7,12,240

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

240/-.\n2.\nThe Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming\ndisallowance u/s 36(i)(iii) of Rs.5,95,000/- despite the fact that the advances\nwere given for business purposes only.\n3.\nThe Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming\naddition of Rs.8,04,000/- being notional interest advances or rent given for\nbusiness purposes