RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,),HARYANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

B it becomes clear that any industrial undertaking, which becomes eligible on satisfying sub-section(2), would be entitled to deduction under sub-section (1) only to the extent of profits derived from such industrial undertaking after specified date(s). Hence, apart from eligibility, sub-section (1) purports to restrict the quantum of deduction to a specified percentage of profits

JCIT(OSD), CIR-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE (INDIA) LTD, HARYANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

B it becomes clear that any industrial undertaking, which becomes eligible on satisfying sub-section(2), would be entitled to deduction under sub-section (1) only to the extent of profits derived from such industrial undertaking after specified date(s). Hence, apart from eligibility, sub-section (1) purports to restrict the quantum of deduction to a specified percentage of profits

APEX HEALTH CARE LIMITED,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BHARUCH PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. I.T.A No. 547/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 3 Apex Health Care Ltd. vs. DCIT 2.2. In reply the assessee justified the increase by stating that on verification of the job work charges billed, it was much lesser than the cost incurred for doing job work. In view of the same, charges were

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine. So far as the latter is concerned, the Assessing Officer is empowered to make a best judgment assessment as provided in section 144, that

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine. So far as the latter is concerned, the Assessing Officer is empowered to make a best judgment assessment as provided in section 144, that

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine. So far as the latter is concerned, the Assessing Officer is empowered to make a best judgment assessment as provided in section 144, that

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine. So far as the latter is concerned, the Assessing Officer is empowered to make a best judgment assessment as provided in section 144, that

CREST SPECIALITY RESINS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHEDA, GUJARAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD (NOW DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1),AHMEDABAD), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the years under\nconsideration

40A(2)(b) of the Act, with respect to similar\ncommission expenses. Copy of the order passed by the ITAT has been placed\non record before us.\n\n15. Further, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that even for A.Y. 2014-\n15 the ITAT Ahmedabad in assessee's own case in ITA No. 2917/Ahd/2017\nvide order dated 23.02.2022 deleted similar

CREST COMPOSITES & PLASTICS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in respect of Ground

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee vide letter dated 22.11.2016 furnished details of services rendered, which were towards commission for collection of old and doubtful debts, sales promotion, commission for loan syndication through SIDBI. The Ld. AO however rejected the assessee’s claim by holding that no documentary evidence was I.T.A No. 2917/Ahd/2017

BASE METAL CHEMICALS,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: The First Appellate Authority Which Was Decided By Ld. Cit(A) Vide The Impugned Order & The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed.

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 02-09-2016 declaring income I.T.A No. 361//Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No 2 Base

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

2)(b) of the Act was not invoked before making adhoc disallowance of 50% of ITA No.1273/Ahd/2018 (PiramalFinance Pvt. Ltd.vs. ACIT) A.Y.– 2014-15 - 15 – guarantee commission. Even in the case where the provision of Section 40A is invoked, the AO has to establish that the expenditure was excessive or unreasonable having regard to fair market value of the payment

AKSHATAM CONSTRUCTION LLP,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1559/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Akshatam Construction Llp, D.C.I.T., 302, Silver Coin, Vs. Circle-1(2), Shrenik Park Char Rasta, Vadodara. Nr. Akota Statdium, Vadodara-390020. Pan: Aaxfa6302N

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act, we are of the view that it was the onus upon the Revenue based on record with the comparative cases before reaching to the conclusion that the assessee has incurred excessive expenditure under the head labour charges by way of making payment to the related person. The assessee has certainly filed the quotations

INTAS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, R-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

40A(2)(b) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also made disallowance of Foreign Exchange loss on capital assets amounting to Rs.86,27,682/- as per the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of sales promotion amounting to Rs.81,23,963/- under Section 37(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer further made

GUJARAT INFRAPIPES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS on International Transaction of Rs.54,000/- and ITA Nos. 813 & 987/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 M/s. Gujarat Infrapipes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 4 Ground No. 6 is relating to disallowance of Rs.60,517/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. Since the amounts involved in all these issues are very small, the same are dismissed without going into the merits

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INFRA PIPES PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

TDS on International Transaction of Rs.54,000/- and ITA Nos. 813 & 987/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2013-14 M/s. Gujarat Infrapipes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 4 Ground No. 6 is relating to disallowance of Rs.60,517/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. Since the amounts involved in all these issues are very small, the same are dismissed without going into the merits

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS 34,146 10 Disallowance of Bonus and Leave 6,14,958 Encashment u/s.43B 11 Disallowance of Provision for Excise Duty 2,96,220 u/s.43B 12 Disallowance of interest towards China 10,37,451 Project 13 Disallowance of prepaid Insurance 2,39,630/- 14 Disallowance u/s.40A(2)(b) of the Act. 20,26,491/- 15 Disallowance u/s.14A

SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS 34,146 10 Disallowance of Bonus and Leave 6,14,958 Encashment u/s.43B 11 Disallowance of Provision for Excise Duty 2,96,220 u/s.43B 12 Disallowance of interest towards China 10,37,451 Project 13 Disallowance of prepaid Insurance 2,39,630/- 14 Disallowance u/s.40A(2)(b) of the Act. 20,26,491/- 15 Disallowance u/s.14A

NITIN NATWWARLAL PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2) NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2014-15 Nitin Natwarlal Patel Vs. Dcit, Cir.1(2), Now C-24, Mrc Colony Cir.1(1)(1) Gorwa, Vadodara. Vadodara. Pan : Agypp 3931 F (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Viranch Modi, Ar : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10/05/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. The Id. AO has made additions of Rs.11,700/- TDS deducted from salary