THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Us.

285/- (v) Sundry balances of vendors written off Rs.12.91.362/- Rs. 19,33,215/- Total 2.4. It is here to be mentioned that the AO has not granted the deduction on the aforesaid amounts by saying that none of the above income can be held to be generated from the manufacturing activities of the undertaking, and therefore, the nature of above

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1`),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee; all are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kedia

TDS was not required to be deducted. This aspect has been examined ITA No.2490/Ahd/2014 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd. 20 in host of decisions. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee put reliance upon the order of the ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., ITA No.634/Ahd/2017. In this order, Tribunal has relied

CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

285 & 286/AHD/2013 vide order dated 19/07/2013 where the Hon’ble ITAT allowed the depreciation. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. Both the Ld. DR and the Ld. AR before us relied on the orders of the authorities below as favourable to them. 30. At the outset, we note that

ITO(EXEMPTIONS),, AHMEDABAD vs. CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

285 & 286/AHD/2013 vide order dated 19/07/2013 where the Hon’ble ITAT allowed the depreciation. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. Both the Ld. DR and the Ld. AR before us relied on the orders of the authorities below as favourable to them. 30. At the outset, we note that

PIRAMAL FINANCE PVT. LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

285/- which is never received by the Appellant be deleted GROUND II: ACTING BEYOND THE POWERS VESTED US 251 OF THE ACT: 1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in setting aside the issue to the AO with the direction to make inquiries in respect of alleged receipt of an income

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI VIPINBHAI SOMABHAI PUJARA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS from interest paid to two NBFCs namely City Corp India Finance Limited and DSP Merrill Lynch Limited. The Assessing Officer observed that provisions of Section 194A are applicable in assessee’s case and, therefore, expenses incurred on interest should be disallowed. Order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was passed on 07.11.2016 thereby assessing

SHRI VIPINBHAI SOMABHAI PUJARA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

TDS from interest paid to two NBFCs namely City Corp India Finance Limited and DSP Merrill Lynch Limited. The Assessing Officer observed that provisions of Section 194A are applicable in assessee’s case and, therefore, expenses incurred on interest should be disallowed. Order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was passed on 07.11.2016 thereby assessing

M/S. KOSA CONSTRUCTION,,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(3),, VADODARA

In the result, all the grounds appeal of the assessee are allowed

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” 2. As the facts and issues involved in three appeals are similar, so, we take ITA No. 919/Ahd/2016 for assessment year 2007-08 as the lead case and its findings will be applicable to the other two appeal i.e. ITA Nos. 920 I.T.A

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD. ( AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-3,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS provision shall be readjudicated as per law. This ground is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. This assessee’s appeal ITA No.1718/Ahd/2011 is partly allowed.” 9. The Learned DR at the time of hearing has not brought anything on record contrary to the finding of the ITAT, as discussed above, suggesting that there was the change in the facts

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN ANAGRAM STOCK BROKING LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS provision shall be readjudicated as per law. This ground is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. This assessee’s appeal ITA No.1718/Ahd/2011 is partly allowed.” 9. The Learned DR at the time of hearing has not brought anything on record contrary to the finding of the ITAT, as discussed above, suggesting that there was the change in the facts

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD., AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS provision shall be readjudicated as per law. This ground is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. This assessee’s appeal ITA No.1718/Ahd/2011 is partly allowed.” 9. The Learned DR at the time of hearing has not brought anything on record contrary to the finding of the ITAT, as discussed above, suggesting that there was the change in the facts

ITO, WARD - 4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE GAYATRI COTTEX ENGINEERS PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

285/- made by AO on account of bogus purchase despite the fact that: (i) the vendors failed to respond to Section 133(6) notices during the assessment proceedings. (ii) the assessee failed to produce primary evidence, such as invoices, delivery challans, and payment proofs, to establish the genuineness of the purchases. (iii) Mere furnishing of ledger confirmations at the appellate

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

285 277-09 902,565 902,565 294-07 1,487,860 1,487,860 296-12 200,000 200,

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2(1) (2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

285 277-09 902,565 902,565 294-07 1,487,860 1,487,860 296-12 200,000 200,

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

285 277-09 902,565 902,565 294-07 1,487,860 1,487,860 296-12 200,000 200,

LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

285 277-09 902,565 902,565 294-07 1,487,860 1,487,860 296-12 200,000 200,