GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

depreciation, penalty could not be imposed and held as follows. 8. In order to invoke the penalty proceedings under section

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

depreciation, penalty could not be imposed and held as follows. 8. In order to invoke the penalty proceedings under section

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

depreciation, penalty could not be imposed and held as follows. 8. In order to invoke the penalty proceedings under section

XCELRIS LABS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

penalty on\nthe depreciation disallowed pertaining to inflated cost of assets.\n12. With respect to the other portion of depreciation

M/S. ABHISHEK ENGINEERS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty u/s 271(1)© of the Act in respect of the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 1311225 though the pre- requisites

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2009-10

penalty on additions of depreciation of Rs.1,80,63,211/-, prior period expenses of Rs.18,27,854/-, provision for bad and doubtful

AXIS BANK LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT (A)-6, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalty for filing of inaccurate particulars of income in Income Tax Return. The Bank was under a bona fide belief that depreciation

M/S. ASIAN FOOD INDUSTRIES,,NADIAD vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NADIAD

Appeal is allowed

penalty of Rs.3,39,846/- in respect of quantum disallowance of depreciation claim coming to Rs.3,39,846/- in ITA No. 3076/Ahd/15

N.K.PHARMA INDUSTRIES (NOW KNOWN AS NKP PHARMA PVT. LTD., ),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1575/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02)

penalty under s.271(1)(c) of the Act on excess claim of depreciation of Rs.11,26,823/- in the Asst.Year

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms Madhumita Roy

depreciation claim of Rs.18,47,95,000/- was disallowed. A penalty proceeding u/s.272(1)(c) of the Act was also

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ CO. LTD.,, MEHSANA

In the result, for A.Y

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty in respect of excess depreciation which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, in light of ITA No.2081/Ahd/2012 in respect

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ CO. LTD.,, BARODA

In the result, for A.Y

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty in respect of excess depreciation which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, in light of ITA No.2081/Ahd/2012 in respect

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

In the result, for A.Y

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty in respect of excess depreciation which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, in light of ITA No.2081/Ahd/2012 in respect

M/S. UTTAR GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(4),, BARODA

In the result, for A.Y

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty in respect of excess depreciation which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, in light of ITA No.2081/Ahd/2012 in respect

ADANI AGRI FRESH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal and the Cross Objection of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1653/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 & C.O. 201/Ahd/2015 (In Ita No.2720/Ahd/2015) "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Adani Agri Fresh Ltd., D.C.I.T, Adani House, Vs. Circle-1, Nr. Mithakhali Six Roads, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aafca0413P

Depreciation Penalty 94389144 ROC fees for increasing 20000 Authorised Cap. 2948050 Unpaid bonus Donation 233100 Provision for doubtful debts 400000 Unpaid

SHRI GIRISHBHAI M.PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,MEHSANA CIRCLE,, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 337/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2005-2006 Girishbhai M. Patel, A.C.I.T., 4, Regent Park, Vs. Mehsana Circle, Vanza Co-Operative Society, Mehsana. Part-Ii, Near Judges Bungalow, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Abypp8093M

depreciation of cars Rs.1,02,991/- (4) Disallowance of insurance amount claimed Rs.40,184/- Rs.24,27,511/- Total Income Rs.32,47,959/- i.e Rs.32,47,960/- 4.1 The AO in the assessment order has recorded to have issued penalty

M.V. OMNI PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly direct the A.O. to delete the penalty so levied. Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri S. S. Godara)

Depreciation Rs. 1,33,961/-. 4. Penalty proceeding were separately initiated. 5. During the course of the penal proceedings, the assessee

BHIKHABHAI AMBALAL PATEL,,KALOL vs. ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2008-09

penalty proceeding initiated against addition of Rs.4,96,888/- on account of Apparent Mistake in claim of depreciation by the Lrd. AO while