SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business income’, whereas it should have been considered as ‘income from other sources’. Against the above interest income, the assessee had debited various expenses on account of depreciation

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1187 & 896/Ahd/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2000-2001 & 2004-2005 Nirma Limited, A.C.I.T., Nirma House, Vs. Circle-5, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

depreciation and expenses claimed as business expenses, therefore income should not be excluded. If income is excluded then corresponding expense

NIRMA LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1187 & 896/Ahd/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2000-2001 & 2004-2005 Nirma Limited, A.C.I.T., Nirma House, Vs. Circle-5, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

depreciation and expenses claimed as business expenses, therefore income should not be excluded. If income is excluded then corresponding expense

ATUL LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT (OSD), RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Us, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Took Us Through The Chronology Of Events Leading To The Rectification Order Passed U/S. 154 Of The Act ,Which Was Carried In Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Who Dismissed The Same & Against Which The Assessee Has Come Up In Appeal Before Us. Ld. Counsel For The

depreciation, the resultant income shall comprise of Capital Gain, Income from House Property and Income from other sources which are not "Profit derived from the business

EFFECTIVE TELESERVICES PVT. LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the order passed under Section 263 of the Act is directed to be set-aside

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation on such property for income tax purposes and once Assessing Officer has already held such income as income from business

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,, MEHSANA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(4),, BARODA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 4, BARODA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,, MEHSANA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(4),, BARODA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,, MEHSANA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

business of purchase and distribution of electricity. The assessee filed e-return of income on 28.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation

MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED,VADODARA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Business Income. 3.0 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of claim of additional depreciation