ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

xviii) or in Explanation 1 to section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory. 21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. Now we shall come to the assessee

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

xviii) or in Explanation 1 to section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory. 21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. Now we shall come to the assessee

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

xviii) or in Explanation 1 to section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory. 21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. Now we shall come to the assessee

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

xviii) or in Explanation 1 to section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory. 21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. Now we shall come to the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

xviii) or in Explanation 1 to section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory. 21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. Now we shall come to the assessee

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT , BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

24)(xviii) or in Explanation 1\nto section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory.\n21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned\nCIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer.\nAccordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed.\nNow we shall come

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

24)(xviii) or in Explanation 1\nto section 115JB for such receipts, their inclusion in book profit is mandatory.\n21. In view of the above discussion, we reverse the finding of the learned\nCIT(A) and restore the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer.\nAccordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is allowed.\nNow we shall come

GANDHINAGAR DISTRICT CO.OP.MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGA, GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.513/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gandhinagar District Co- The Asst.Cit बनाम/ Op.Milk Producers Union Ltd. Circle, Gandhinagar V/S. K. Road, Gidc Electronics Estate Sector-25, Gandhinagar Gujarat – 382 024 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaajg 1061 B (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

Section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act, which includes assistance in the form of subsidies or grants received from the government or any other authority and they should be taxed as income under the provisions of the Act. 7.1. We have noted the condition in the MOU that if the funds were not utilized according to the specified terms, they

M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1582/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Venus Infrastructure & D.C.I.T.,(Osd) Developers (P) Ltd., Vs. Central Circle-8, 801-802, Broadway Business Ahmedabad. Centre, Opp. Mayor’S Bungalow, Law Garden Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aahcs6254J

gain on transfer of share after claiming indexed cost of acquisition as the holding period of shares by assessee was for more than 12 month by virtue of proviso to section 2(42A) of the Act read with section 2(29A) of the Act. Thus, the assessee choses one option out of two legally permissible options which it deem most

ACIT ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD, VALLABH VIDYANAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us.

xviii) of the Income Tax Return and accordingly, passed order u/s.154 of the Act denying the carried forward of losses to the tune of Rs.2,38,86,742/-. 5. The Ld. CIT(A), however appreciated the contention made by the assessee before him that the loss for the impugned year was depreciation loss and not business loss and noting

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT,RANGE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

24 of 43 such guarantees is not the kind for consideration for which a banker, for example, issue the guarantees, but it is maximization of gains for the recipient entity and thus the MNE group as a whole. In general, thus, the consideration for issuance of corporate guarantees are of a different character altogether. [Para 39] vii. At this stage

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

xviii. There is no dispute that Explanation to section 92B states that it is merely clarificatory in nature inasmuch as it is 'for the removal of doubts', and, therefore, one has to proceed on the basis that it does not alter the basic character of definition of 'international transaction' under section 92B. Accordingly, this Explanation is to be read

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI PORT & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

xviii. There is no dispute that Explanation to section 92B states that it is merely clarificatory in nature inasmuch as it is 'for the removal of doubts', and, therefore, one has to proceed on the basis that it does not alter the basic character of definition of 'international transaction' under section 92B. Accordingly, this Explanation is to be read