THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSUIT GLASS & CERAMICS PVT. LTD., BARODA

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

11A(1) of the Act and why the penalty should not be imposed under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Act. Various allegations have been made in the show cause notices and from the perusal of the show cause notices it appears that the excess production has been estimated

THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSUIT GLASS & CERAMICS PVT. LTD., BARODA

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

11A(1) of the Act and why the penalty should not be imposed under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Act. Various allegations have been made in the show cause notices and from the perusal of the show cause notices it appears that the excess production has been estimated

M/S. ANAND FOOD & DAIRY PRODUCTS,,ANAND vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1310/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Anand Food & Dairy Dcit, Anand Circle Products Vs Anand. Chikhodra-Sarsa Road Chikhodra 388 320 Pan : Aaefa 0212 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Piyush Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.Dr

11A) of the Act. The ld.counsel for the assessee at the very submitted that the issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by order of the ITAT passed in ITA No.2185/Ahd/2016 for the Asstt.Year 2012-13. 3. The short controversy involved in this case is regarding determination of initial year from which it could be construed that the assessee