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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

151 have decided similar issue in favour of Assessee and held that while computing disallowance under Section 14A, investment in foreign subsidiary should be excluded. On this basis, AO is directed to re-compute disallowance under Section 14A by excluding investments in foreign subsidiaries. Subject to above observation, the ground of appeal is partly allowed. 17. Before us ld. Counsel

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

151 have decided similar issue in favour of Assessee and held that while computing disallowance under Section 14A, investment in foreign subsidiary should be excluded. On this basis, AO is directed to re-compute disallowance under Section 14A by excluding investments in foreign subsidiaries. Subject to above observation, the ground of appeal is partly allowed. 17. Before us ld. Counsel

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

151 have decided similar issue in favour of Assessee and held that while computing disallowance under Section 14A, investment in foreign subsidiary should be excluded. On this basis, AO is directed to re-compute disallowance under Section 14A by excluding investments in foreign subsidiaries. Subject to above observation, the ground of appeal is partly allowed. 17. Before us ld. Counsel

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

151 ITR 75 (Guj.). (iii) Decision in case of CIT vs. Subrata Dutta Choudhary [2010]c32 (I) ITCL 120 (P&H-HC) 11.2 On perusal of the submissions made by the assessee, it was observed that the assessee has claimed additional depreciation on cameras and air conditioners on the ground that they were installed at the factory premises for keeping

SHRI ANILBHAI HIRALAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

151 of the Act was based on the application of mind or it was granted in mechanical manner. We note that the AO has received the report from DIT (INV) UNIT-1(3) Ahmedabad on 24-03-2015. The AO recorded the reason to believe and obtain the approval of the PCIT on same day i.e. 24th of March

SHRI OMPRAKASH KANAYALAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year : 2010-11 Shri Omprakash Kanayalal Shah Ito, Ward-6(1)(5) Ahmedabad. 64/506, Gujarat Housing Board Vs. Opp: Chamanpura Police Station Kalapinagar, Asarwa Amedabad 380016. Pan : Aeaps 2498 J

depreciation. 11 Whether the provisions of section 150(1) are applicable. If the reply is in the affirmative N.A. 4 the releant facts may be stated against Item No.11 and it may also be brought out that the provision of section 150(2) would not stand in the way of initiating proceedings u/s.147 12. Reasons for the belief that

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

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

depreciation, donation, insurance expenses and loan interest amounting to Rs. 5,82,162/-. The ld. Assessing Officer held that in absence of any explanation, the assessee did not conduct any business and the assessee has earned only ‘interest income’ which is considered as ‘income from other sources’. Since the expenses claimed are not allowable against any income other than ‘income

GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

151 was given by Commissioner without recording reasons for his satisfaction, issue of notice under section 148 by Assessing Officer was without due authority of law as it suffered from serious legal infirmities - Held, yes - Whether therefore, reassessment framed by Assessing Officer was to be cancelled - Held, yes Assessee contended in the above referred cases that the reopening

GOLD FINCH JEWELLERY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

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

151 was given by Commissioner without recording reasons for his satisfaction, issue of notice under section 148 by Assessing Officer was without due authority of law as it suffered from serious legal infirmities - Held, yes - Whether therefore, reassessment framed by Assessing Officer was to be cancelled - Held, yes Assessee contended in the above referred cases that the reopening

THE ITO, WARD-13(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SHIVAJIRAO R.CHAVAN,, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

151 of the Act; 5 • that the satisfaction of the AO was not a borrowed satisfaction, and it was based on the report of the CBI of the disproportionate assets found with the assessee, which was shared with the Income Tax authorities, and the assessee was a non-filer of the return of income. 7. This was countered

SHRI SHIVAJIRAO R.CHAVAN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(2),, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

151 of the Act; 5 • that the satisfaction of the AO was not a borrowed satisfaction, and it was based on the report of the CBI of the disproportionate assets found with the assessee, which was shared with the Income Tax authorities, and the assessee was a non-filer of the return of income. 7. This was countered

SHRI NAVINCHANDRA N. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

151 of the Act. 9. We have examined the validity of issuing the notice u/s 148 of the Act. From the reasons recorded, we find that the reopening has been made based on analysis of information collected (refer to para no. 3); the Assessing Officer held that no information was formed Shri Navinchandra N Patel Vs. ACIT Asst. Year

ASIAN OILFIELD SERVICE LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble&

151-153 of Paper Book clearly show that the goods were transported from Delhi to Dimapur (which falls in Nagaland). The transport invoice of M/s. Laxmi Air Service dated 11.02.2008 enclosed 15 ITA.No. 144/AHD/2013 (A.Y: 2009-10) Asian Oilfield Services Limited at Page 150 of paper book also refers to the station Dimapur. As against the same, the airway bills