THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. KANSARA POPATLAL TRIBHOVANDAS METAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed while the Cross

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act” in short] was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee on 06.08.2013. In the return of income, depreciation of Rs.1,68,42,000/- was claimed by the assessee on windmill stated to be purchased and put to use after 01.10.2011. During the course of assessment proceedings, this claim

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 36 (1)(va) of the Act. ITA Nos.722,218&1306/Ahd/2014 & ITA No. 1345/Ahd/2015 A.Ys. 2000-01&2007-08 to 2009-10 33 Under the provision of PF and ESI Act, the period for making the payment has been specified within 15 days from the end of the month in which salary of the assessee became due. However, there

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 36 (1)(va) of the Act. ITA Nos.722,218&1306/Ahd/2014 & ITA No. 1345/Ahd/2015 A.Ys. 2000-01&2007-08 to 2009-10 33 Under the provision of PF and ESI Act, the period for making the payment has been specified within 15 days from the end of the month in which salary of the assessee became due. However, there

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

section 133(6)/131 of the Act in order to find out whether the commercial operation began in the year under consideration. 11.7 We are also conscious to the fact that the genuineness of the plant and machinery has not been doubted by the authorities below. It is also the settled law that the actual use of the plant

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

section 133(6)/131 of the Act in order to find out whether the commercial operation began in the year under consideration. 11.7 We are also conscious to the fact that the genuineness of the plant and machinery has not been doubted by the authorities below. It is also the settled law that the actual use of the plant

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

section 133(6)/131 of the Act in order to find out whether the commercial operation began in the year under consideration. 11.7 We are also conscious to the fact that the genuineness of the plant and machinery has not been doubted by the authorities below. It is also the settled law that the actual use of the plant

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

section 133(6)/131 of the Act in order to find out whether the commercial operation began in the year under consideration. 11.7 We are also conscious to the fact that the genuineness of the plant and machinery has not been doubted by the authorities below. It is also the settled law that the actual use of the plant

MUKESH TRENDS LIFESTYLE LIMITED ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2018-19 Mukesh Trends Lifestyle Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax N.H. No.8, Narol Naroda V. Circle-2(1)(2) Road Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382 405 (Gujarat) Pan: Aabcm0500F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" य थ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" य थ" थ" Assessee By : Shri Vihar Soni, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vipul Chavda, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Coram

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2018-19 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1055630517(1)), the appellate proceedings have arisen before Ld.CIT(A) from assessment order dated 06/04/2021 passed by Ld.AO (hereinafter Mukesh Trends Lifestyle Ltd. v. DCIT. AY 2018-19 2 called “the AO”) u/s.143(3) r.w.s.143

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1285 & 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & Ita No.1396 & 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1327 & 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1414 & 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Ahmedabad. Torrent House Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench

section (5) of Section 80-IA. In this case, the question that arose for consideration ITA.Nos.1285/Ahd/2017 & 7 others A.Y.2009-10 38 before this Court related to computation of the profits for the purpose of deduction under section 80-E, as it then existed, after setting off the loss incurred by the assessee in the manufacture of alloy steels. Section

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 133(6) )f the Act, no adverse finding has been given by the AO in Remand Report hence addition made by AO only on the ground that Appellant has failed to make payment towards purchases cannot be accepted. Therefore, the addition made by AO for Rs.80,51,28,071/- is deleted.” 11.1 Having heard the rival contentions and perused

N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 133(6) )f the Act, no adverse finding has been given by the AO in Remand Report hence addition made by AO only on the ground that Appellant has failed to make payment towards purchases cannot be accepted. Therefore, the addition made by AO for Rs.80,51,28,071/- is deleted.” 11.1 Having heard the rival contentions and perused

M/S. WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133(6) of the Act was received. Likewise, the assessee also failed to submit ledger confirmation from the impugned parties. Thus, the AO added the above stated difference amount and balance from Swati Processors Pvt Ltd to the total income of the assessee. 22. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that difference with Indian

WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

133(6) of the Act was received. Likewise, the assessee also failed to submit ledger confirmation from the impugned parties. Thus, the AO added the above stated difference amount and balance from Swati Processors Pvt Ltd to the total income of the assessee. 22. The assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and submitted that difference with Indian

M/S. UNIQUE METROPOLIS,,AHMEDABAD vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

133(6) of the Act was issued to various parties and the inspector of the ld. Assessing Officer was also deputed to check the genuineness of the parties. After making necessary enquires, it came to light that four parties M/s C. R. Marketing, M/s. Radhe Electricals, M/s. Shree Sai Enterprises and M/s. Madhur Enterprise were found to be non- existent

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNIQUE METROPOILS,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

133(6) of the Act was issued to various parties and the inspector of the ld. Assessing Officer was also deputed to check the genuineness of the parties. After making necessary enquires, it came to light that four parties M/s C. R. Marketing, M/s. Radhe Electricals, M/s. Shree Sai Enterprises and M/s. Madhur Enterprise were found to be non- existent

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GOPAL IRON & STEEL CO.(GUJ.) LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

section 133 (6) was issued and the confirmations were received. In view of I.T.A No. 1901 and C.O. 247/Ahd/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 8 DCIT vs. Gopal Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. these facts and circumstances the appellant has duly discharged its onus of proving the unsecured loans appearing in the balance sheet. The addition made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HARYANA

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

133/-, made by AO. e) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of deduction under section 80IC on expenses disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act amount of Rs.19,34,672/- made by AO. f) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HARYANA

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

133/-, made by AO. e) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of deduction under section 80IC on expenses disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act amount of Rs.19,34,672/- made by AO. f) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HARYANA

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

133/-, made by AO. e) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of deduction under section 80IC on expenses disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act amount of Rs.19,34,672/- made by AO. f) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend