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

10/- each were issued to the shareholders of ILPL, and the 48,00,000 shares of ILPL held by the assessee were cancelled. As a result of this amalgamation, the assessee acquired all the assets and liabilities of ILPL and accounted for the excess of consideration over the net book value of assets as goodwill in its books of account

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

10/- each were issued to the shareholders of ILPL, and the 48,00,000 shares of ILPL held by the assessee were cancelled. As a result of this amalgamation, the assessee acquired all the assets and liabilities of ILPL and accounted for the excess of consideration over the net book value of assets as goodwill in its books of account

GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 43(1) of the Act, the capital grant should be reduced from the cost/WDV of the relevant asset, and thereafter the depreciation is to be calculated. Thus, the capital grant receipt in respect of asset, on which depreciation is allowable at the rate different from 15% should be worked out as per the applicable rate. The DR could

GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 43(1) of the Act, the capital grant should be reduced from the cost/WDV of the relevant asset, and thereafter the depreciation is to be calculated. Thus, the capital grant receipt in respect of asset, on which depreciation is allowable at the rate different from 15% should be worked out as per the applicable rate. The DR could

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,, VADODARA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 43(1) of the Act, the capital grant should be reduced from the cost/WDV of the relevant asset, and thereafter the depreciation is to be calculated. Thus, the capital grant receipt in respect of asset, on which depreciation is allowable at the rate different from 15% should be worked out as per the applicable rate. The DR could

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,, VADODARA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 43(1) of the Act, the capital grant should be reduced from the cost/WDV of the relevant asset, and thereafter the depreciation is to be calculated. Thus, the capital grant receipt in respect of asset, on which depreciation is allowable at the rate different from 15% should be worked out as per the applicable rate. The DR could

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

46. Ground no. 3 reads as under: 3. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in allowing the Additional depreciation of Rs.26,41,911/-. I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 31 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT 47. The issue relates to claim of additional depreciation

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

46. Ground no. 3 reads as under: 3. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in allowing the Additional depreciation of Rs.26,41,911/-. I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 31 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT 47. The issue relates to claim of additional depreciation

THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S. KALPARATRU POWER TRANSMISSION LIMITED,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

46. Ground no. 3 reads as under: 3. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in allowing the Additional depreciation of Rs.26,41,911/-. I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 31 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT 47. The issue relates to claim of additional depreciation

SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 20(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation of plant and machinery used by Sun Pharma Industries & M/s. Sun Pharma Sikkim. III(a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred in deleting, the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IE(6) r.w.s. 80IA(10) on apportionment of selling and distribution expenses of Rs.182,57,00,000/- incurred by the working

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

10. Ground No.4:- Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) of the I T Act. This Ground is only consequential in nature and does not require specific adjudication as the main case itself is set aside to the Assessing Officer for refresh consideration. 11. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under

GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

10. Ground No.4:- Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) of the I T Act. This Ground is only consequential in nature and does not require specific adjudication as the main case itself is set aside to the Assessing Officer for refresh consideration. 11. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

10. Ground No.4:- Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) of the I T Act. This Ground is only consequential in nature and does not require specific adjudication as the main case itself is set aside to the Assessing Officer for refresh consideration. 11. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under

GUJARAT ENERGY TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

10. Ground No.4:- Initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(l)(c) of the I T Act. This Ground is only consequential in nature and does not require specific adjudication as the main case itself is set aside to the Assessing Officer for refresh consideration. 11. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the Revenue reads as under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN VEJALPUR, PRAHLAD NAGAR vs. SABARKANTHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PORODUCERS UNION LIMITED, MILK PRODUCERS UNION

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

depreciation claimed for addition in new machinery in preceding year of Rs. 46,10,700/-, without taking into consideration the retrospective applicability of the third proviso to Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN VEJALPUR vs. SABARKANTHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED, MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

depreciation claimed for addition in new machinery in preceding year of Rs. 46,10,700/-, without taking into consideration the retrospective applicability of the third proviso to Section

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

depreciation for Rs. 8,82,682/- only. 20. The aggrieved assessee carried the matter before learned CIT (A) and reiterated its contention as made during assessment proceeding. 21. However, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the disallowances of repair and maintenance expenses to the extent of Rs. 35,13,250/- in part by observing as under: “18.2. I have carefully considered

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

depreciation for Rs. 8,82,682/- only. 20. The aggrieved assessee carried the matter before learned CIT (A) and reiterated its contention as made during assessment proceeding. 21. However, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the disallowances of repair and maintenance expenses to the extent of Rs. 35,13,250/- in part by observing as under: “18.2. I have carefully considered