SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

capital gain of Rs. 225.50 crore as exempt and the assessee has itself admitted during the course of assessment that the investment in shares of Indian companies would yield dividend income that is exempt u/s. 10(34) of the act. I.T.A No. 702 & 729/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 26 Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT/Dy. CIT vs. Sun Pharmaceutical

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

801C of the I. T. Act, 1961. The appellant further claimed that as per tire various decisions and judgements the income pertaining to the interest on electricity deposit, recovery from transporters and sundry balances of suppliers return back was held to be the income derived indirectly from the business / manufacturing activities of the appellant, and therefore, the same is eligible

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

801C of the I. T. Act, 1961. The appellant further claimed that as per tire various decisions and judgements the income pertaining to the interest on electricity deposit, recovery from transporters and sundry balances of suppliers return back was held to be the income derived indirectly from the business / manufacturing activities of the appellant, and therefore, the same is eligible

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

801C of the I. T. Act, 1961. The appellant further claimed that as per tire various decisions and judgements the income pertaining to the interest on electricity deposit, recovery from transporters and sundry balances of suppliers return back was held to be the income derived indirectly from the business / manufacturing activities of the appellant, and therefore, the same is eligible