M/S. VAIBHAV CONSTRUCTION,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,, ANAND

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

801B(10) of the Act including the size of the plot were duly fulfilled and complied with. It may also be pointed out the Revenue has neither filed any miscellaneous application nor approached the Hon. High Court against the order passed by the Hon. ITAT and therefore the same stands final and conclusive. 6. In pursuance of the matter being

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

section 192 of the Act. But the assessee has claimed such expenses without deducting the TDS. Thus the impugned expenses cannot be allowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on records

M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

section 192 of the Act. But the assessee has claimed such expenses without deducting the TDS. Thus the impugned expenses cannot be allowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on records

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. MRS. CRYOGAS EQUIPOMNET PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

capital as the profits are deductible @ 100% from the undertaking working under SEZ. It was for this reason that he invoked the provisions of section 10AA(9) r.w.s. 80IA(10) of the Act and accordingly estimated the NP @ 2% of the total turnover as against 18.94% declared by the assessee and calculated the deduction u/s 10AA at Rs.16

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

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

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

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

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

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

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

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

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gaining businesses from them. Accordingly the learned CIT-A was pleased to delete the addition made by the AO on account of adjustment for the interest on the advances given to the AEs namely “Jina Pharmaceuticals, INC USA” and Lambda Therapeutic Research, SP Z.O.O Poland” by observing that the assessee was able to generate the business and income from such

SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 20(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

capital goods purchased were never installed by SPI. There is also no dispute of the fact that the undertaking was under construction at the time when SPI sold it to the Appellant. Accordingly, the unit is transferred before commencement of undertaking. Thus Group Appeals – Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd (Erstwhile M/s. Sun Pharma Sikkim