M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(1),, BARODA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

10 to Section 43(1). The AO shall reduce the proportionate amount of subsidy from the actual cost of fixed assets, in line with the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench and re- compute depreciation on the revised cost of assets, following the provisions of Section 32 of the Act. 10.11. In light of the above discussions, the appeals filed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

10 to Section 43(1). The AO shall reduce the proportionate amount of subsidy from the actual cost of fixed assets, in line with the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench and re- compute depreciation on the revised cost of assets, following the provisions of Section 32 of the Act. 10.11. In light of the above discussions, the appeals filed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1),, VADODARA vs. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER &\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

depreciation computation under Section\n43(1) of the Act, and its implications for the determination of book profits\nunder Section 115JB.\n2. 9. Following appeals have now been reconstructed and listed for\nadjudication -\nITA No.\nAssessment\nYear\nAppellant\nAmount in\nDispute (Rs.)\n784/Ahd/2013\n2003-04\nAssessee\nNot quantified\n2007/Ahd/2007 | 2004-05\nRevenue\n62,38,589/-\n1619/Ahd/2008 | 2005-06\nRevenue

THE ACIT,(OSD)CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross-objection of the assessee, both are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Amarjit Singh

10 (other than the provisions contained in clause (38) thereof) or section 11 or section 12 apply; or] (g) the amount of depreciation

MAXXIS RUBBER INDIA PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

10+11+12+13+14) 16 Depreciation disallowed under - - section 38(2) of the I.T. Act (out of column 15) 17 Net aggregate

MAKSON PHARMACEUTICALS(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,SURENDRANAGAR vs. PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - Additional depreciation (Illustration) - Assessment years 2012- 13 and 2013-14-Assessee company was engaged in business of providing referral laboratory services and diagnostic services etc. Assessee had set up various collection centers at multiple locations - Assessee claimed additional depreciation on its assets used in such collection centres-Revenue was of view

SHRENO LIMITED,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NOW CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Tribunal Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-2, Vadodara, Dated 19.11.2015 Passed For A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are Not In Consonance With Rule 8 Of Itat Rules, They Are Descriptive & Argumentative In Nature. In Brief, In The First Fold Of Grievance, Assessee Pleaded That The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Required To Be Made U/S. 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1962 Read With Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules. Learned Counsel For The

10 (other than the provisions contained in clause (38) thereof) or section 11 or section 12 apply; or (g) the amount of depreciation

SUZUKI MOTOR GUJARAT PVT LTD,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDANAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

10+11+12+13+14) Depreciation disallowed under 16 section 38(2) of the I.T. Act (out of - - - column 15) - 17 5,29,41,01,183 11,07,99,883 Net aggregate

BOSCH REXROTH (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation on office equipment) and ground number 5 (disallowance of the valuation of inventory) has already been discussed and decided in favour of the assessee by dealing with ground numbers 1 and 3 of the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11. ITA No. 931/Ahd/2015 & 448/Ahd/2016 Hagglunds Drives (India) Pvt. Ltd./ Bosch Rexroth (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT

HAGGLUNDS DRIVES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ( NOW MERGED IN BOSCH REXROTH (INDIA) LTD.),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation on office equipment) and ground number 5 (disallowance of the valuation of inventory) has already been discussed and decided in favour of the assessee by dealing with ground numbers 1 and 3 of the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11. ITA No. 931/Ahd/2015 & 448/Ahd/2016 Hagglunds Drives (India) Pvt. Ltd./ Bosch Rexroth (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT

THE DCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. V. F. ARVIND BRANDS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1904/Ahd/2013 & Cross Objection No. 204/Ahd/2013 (In Ita No.1904/Ahd/2013) िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T.(Osd), M/S. V. F. Arvind Brands Pvt. Circle-8, Vs. Ltd. Ahmedabad. Arvind Mills Premises, Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025. Pan: Aaccv 2727 L (Applicant) (Responent) / Cross Objector

38,000/- Customer 18,15,75,000/- 25% 4,53,93,750/- 3. Relationship Total 72,45,84,000/- 25% 18,14,46,000/- However, the AO was not satisfied with the claim of the depreciation of the assessee in respect of the above assets due to the reasons as detailed under: Arvind Brands Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT(OSD) Asstt

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 80-IE. The goodwill recorded in the books has not been shown to be revaluation of existing tangible assets, and therefore, the ground is without merit. ITA No.281 and 222/Ahd/2021 38 67. In light of the above discussion, we do not find any error in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) allowing the depreciation on goodwill. The facts

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

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 80-IE. The goodwill recorded in the books has not been shown to be revaluation of existing tangible assets, and therefore, the ground is without merit. ITA No.281 and 222/Ahd/2021 38 67. In light of the above discussion, we do not find any error in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) allowing the depreciation on goodwill. The facts

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

38) thereof) or [***] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the [statement of profit and loss]; or ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd.] A.Y. 2011-12 & 2013-14 - 11 - 113. And section 10(2A) of the Act says that in the case of a person being a partner

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

38) thereof) or [***] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the [statement of profit and loss]; or ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd.] A.Y. 2011-12 & 2013-14 - 11 - 113. And section 10(2A) of the Act says that in the case of a person being a partner

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

38) thereof) or [***] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the [statement of profit and loss]; or ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd.] A.Y. 2011-12 & 2013-14 - 11 - 113. And section 10(2A) of the Act says that in the case of a person being a partner

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. , BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

38) thereof) or [***] section 11 or section 12 apply, if any such amount is credited to the [statement of profit and loss]; or ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd.] A.Y. 2011-12 & 2013-14 - 11 - 113. And section 10(2A) of the Act says that in the case of a person being a partner

ACIT ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD, VALLABH VIDYANAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us.

Section 32(2) of the Act is very clear that full effect of depreciation is not given in the particular assessment year then its unabsorbed depreciation and it will be added to depreciation amount of next assessment year till the depreciation is fully absorbed. 8. Please refer below table to calculate unabsorbed depreciation :- Particulars Amount (Rs.) Remarks Depreciation amount