ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

depreciation on the above (as per Para No.7) 10. Trade Mark Registration fee & Rs. 14,14,36,698 Patent Fee (as per Para No. 8) 11. Research & Development Rs. 109,74,61,000 (as per Para No. 9) 12.Disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act Rs.8,05,91,640/- Rs.234,23,50,734/- (as per Para No. 10) Assessed Business Income

TURAKHIA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.677/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2015-16)

condone the delay. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of decorative veneers and ply- woods and other related products and also dealing in finance & trading in shares and securities since last many years. The assessee filed its return of income on 09/09/2015

SAMIR NETWORKS LLP(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS SAMIR STOCKHOLDINGS PVT. LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2016-17 Samir Networks Llp The Acit (Converted From Samir Networks Vs Circle-4(1)91) Private Limited) Ahmedabad [Previously Known As Samil Stockholdings Pvt.Ltd.] 8, Abhishree Residency-2 B/H. Kantam Party Plot, Bopal Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) Pan: Aaccs 6455 J (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/12/2024

condone the said delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 4. Referring to the above grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that, the solitary issue in the present appeal, was the treatment of the income returned by the assessee under the head “business income” as an “income from other sources” and thereafter denial

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

ARUN GOPILAL SAMNANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

delay of 71 days is condoned .Order was pronounced in the Open Court. 7.1 Thereafter, both the appeals were proceeded to be adjudicated. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the short issue in the present appeal related to the assessee being denied the benefit of paying taxes under the new regime as provided under section 115BCA

BHARGAVKUMAR PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

delay of 71 days is condoned .Order was pronounced in the Open Court. 7.1 Thereafter, both the appeals were proceeded to be adjudicated. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the short issue in the present appeal related to the assessee being denied the benefit of paying taxes under the new regime as provided under section 115BCA

ALDIABLOS INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 353, 354, 355, 356 & 357/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

delay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. Facts of the case 4. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in software-related services. In all years under consideration, the assessments were reopened under section 147 based on information received from the Investigation Wing regarding substantial cash deposits made in the assessee’s bank accounts

HANNING MOTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

depreciation.\n9. The learned AO has erred in computing the tax liability without providing setoff\nof MAT credit available as per provisions of section 115JAA of the Act.\n10. The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act of\nRs.1,10,58,900/-. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, interest\nunder

KREATE KONNECT E SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Kcreate Konnect E Solutions Dy. Cit, Cir.1(1)(1) Private Limited Vs. Vadodara. 291M 2Bd Floor, Green Villa-11 B/H. Abs Tower Old Padra Road Vadodara Pan : Aagck 1493 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Jigar Adhyaru, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Dated 18.09.2024, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2020– 21, Whereby The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Intimation Issued Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Dated 18.12.2021 Was Dismissed.

condone the lapse, holding the form to be a mandatory requirement without which the option under section 115BAA could not be deemed validly exercised. Though we respectfully note the findings recorded by the CIT(A), upon an independent and comprehensive appraisal of the factual and legal matrix, we find ourselves unable to concur with the view so taken

SHIVASHISH FOUNDATION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT(OSD), CIRCLE-1 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

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

depreciation of Rs.25,48,340/- claimed u/s 11, but upheld the disallowance of exemption u/s 11(1)(a) and 11(2) aggregating to Rs.2,75,53,498/-, on the ground that the assessee had violated Shivashish Foundation Trust Vs. JIT(OSD) Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– provisions of section 13(1)(c) by making loans and advances of Rs.2

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. KOTA BARAN TOLLWAY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

delay in filing of the present appeal is hereby being condoned. On Merits: 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in business of building infrastructure facilities and earning income by way of collecting toll from vehicles running on roads constructed by the assessee. DCIT vs. Kota Baran Tollway Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Year

GUJARAT SAFETY COUNCIL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 901, 902 & 1037/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18) िनधा"रण वष" Gujarat Safety Council Ito बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 4Th Floor, Midway Height, Ward Exemption, Vs. Kirti Mandir, Kalaghoda, Vadodara Station Road, Vadodara, Gujarat, 390001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatg0943L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 21/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee. While Two Of The Appeals Are Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 28.08.2023 & 27/09/2023 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17 Respectively, The Third Appeal Is Against The Order Of Addl./Jcit (A)-1, Coimbatore For The A.Y. 2017-18. The Issue Involved In All Three Appeals Are

delay is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal: “1. The order passed NFAC is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC / CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.19,86,737/- by invoking provision of section 11(3) of the Act. 3. Ld. NFAC

GUJARAT SAFETY COUNCIL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 901, 902 & 1037/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18) िनधा"रण वष" Gujarat Safety Council Ito बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 4Th Floor, Midway Height, Ward Exemption, Vs. Kirti Mandir, Kalaghoda, Vadodara Station Road, Vadodara, Gujarat, 390001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatg0943L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 21/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee. While Two Of The Appeals Are Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 28.08.2023 & 27/09/2023 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17 Respectively, The Third Appeal Is Against The Order Of Addl./Jcit (A)-1, Coimbatore For The A.Y. 2017-18. The Issue Involved In All Three Appeals Are

delay is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal: “1. The order passed NFAC is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC / CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.19,86,737/- by invoking provision of section 11(3) of the Act. 3. Ld. NFAC

GUJARAT SAFETY COUNCIL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 901, 902 & 1037/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18) िनधा"रण वष" Gujarat Safety Council Ito बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 4Th Floor, Midway Height, Ward Exemption, Vs. Kirti Mandir, Kalaghoda, Vadodara Station Road, Vadodara, Gujarat, 390001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatg0943L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 21/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee. While Two Of The Appeals Are Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 28.08.2023 & 27/09/2023 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17 Respectively, The Third Appeal Is Against The Order Of Addl./Jcit (A)-1, Coimbatore For The A.Y. 2017-18. The Issue Involved In All Three Appeals Are

delay is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal: “1. The order passed NFAC is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC / CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.19,86,737/- by invoking provision of section 11(3) of the Act. 3. Ld. NFAC

ROSELABS POLYMERS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2012-13 An Exparte Appellate Order Was Passed. For The Assessment Year 2012-13 One Shri Sagar Vasoya Appeared Before Ld. Cit(A), However The Assessee Appeal Was Dismissed By A Detailed Speaking Order.

condonation petition explaining the delay, the present appeal is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed in limine. I.T.A No. 425/Ahd/2019 & 28/Ahd/2018 A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 8 Roselabs Polymers Ltd. vs. DCIT 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed. ITA No. 28/AHD/2018 relating to the Assessment Year

ROSELABS POLYMERS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2012-13 An Exparte Appellate Order Was Passed. For The Assessment Year 2012-13 One Shri Sagar Vasoya Appeared Before Ld. Cit(A), However The Assessee Appeal Was Dismissed By A Detailed Speaking Order.

condonation petition explaining the delay, the present appeal is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed in limine. I.T.A No. 425/Ahd/2019 & 28/Ahd/2018 A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 8 Roselabs Polymers Ltd. vs. DCIT 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed. ITA No. 28/AHD/2018 relating to the Assessment Year