NIRMA LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCTI , CIRCLE-3(1)(1) NOW DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nirma Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-380 009 Circle-3(1)(1), Pan : Aaacn 5350 K Ahmedabad-380009 अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09.10.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 10.04.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee Is As Follows:-

156 is paid in excess of such demand.” 4. The relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) denying the assessee interest on refund of self-assessment tax is at paragraph 7.2 of his order which reads as under:- “7.2 Submission of the appellant is duly considered. Proviso to the section 244A (1) [supra] referring to the clause (aa) says that

URMIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 156 specifying the time period within which amount of tax payable, if any, is to be paid. (i) for the assessment year relevant to the previous year referred to in sub-rule (1); and (ii)for the assessment year's subsequent to the assessment your referred to in clause 10. if the order for such assessment year results

URMIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 156 specifying the time period within which amount of tax payable, if any, is to be paid. (i) for the assessment year relevant to the previous year referred to in sub-rule (1); and (ii)for the assessment year's subsequent to the assessment your referred to in clause 10. if the order for such assessment year results

GSP CROP SCIENCE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

156 taxmann.com 369. With regard to the additional depreciation of Rs. 12,05,222/-, we find that the assessee had claimed the balance 50% additional depreciation as per the provisions of 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

Section 5. However, in any such litigation suit SPIL agrees to assist SPGI, without assuming any monetary obligation. 4.3 Legal Compliance. SPIL hereby undertakes to comply with all requirements of law for obtaining various licenses, approvals, permissions and no objection certificates for meeting all legal obligations in respect of any matter ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

Section 5. However, in any such litigation suit SPIL agrees to assist SPGI, without assuming any monetary obligation. 4.3 Legal Compliance. SPIL hereby undertakes to comply with all requirements of law for obtaining various licenses, approvals, permissions and no objection certificates for meeting all legal obligations in respect of any matter ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

Section 5. However, in any such litigation suit SPIL agrees to assist SPGI, without assuming any monetary obligation. 4.3 Legal Compliance. SPIL hereby undertakes to comply with all requirements of law for obtaining various licenses, approvals, permissions and no objection certificates for meeting all legal obligations in respect of any matter ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

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

Section 5. However, in any such litigation suit SPIL agrees to assist SPGI, without assuming any monetary obligation. 4.3 Legal Compliance. SPIL hereby undertakes to comply with all requirements of law for obtaining various licenses, approvals, permissions and no objection certificates for meeting all legal obligations in respect of any matter ITA No. 1462, 1463, 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2018 [Sun Pharma Laboratories

TRISHA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-2(1)(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13

156/- income Additions: (a) Disallowance under section 14A Rs.5,90,932/- (b) On account of withdrawal of Right Rs.22,00,000/- (c) Loss on sale of asset Rs.10,730/- (d) On account of difference in Rs.97,101/- depreciation

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

156, wherein circular issued by the CBDT in this regard has been relied upon. Same is reproduced here:– "171. Claim for depreciation - Where required particulars have not been furnished. – (1) Numerous instances have come to the notice of the Board where the assessee’s claim for depreciation duly shown in the return was not considered by the Income-tax Officer

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

156, wherein circular issued by the CBDT in this regard has been relied upon. Same is reproduced here:– "171. Claim for depreciation - Where required particulars have not been furnished. – (1) Numerous instances have come to the notice of the Board where the assessee’s claim for depreciation duly shown in the return was not considered by the Income-tax Officer

M/S. SHILP GRAVURES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGALURU

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation. However, the plant & machinery in previous assessment year was put to use for less than 180 days therefore the assessee claimed only 50% of such additional claim in the immediate previous year and remaining 50% claimed in the year under consideration. The claim made in previous assessment year for 50% amount has been allowed therefore remaining 50% should also

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

section 80-IA of the Act. 64.1 However, the AO was of the view that no benefit of bad debts recovery can be granted by allowing deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that the amount of bad debt was recognized by the assessee when its unit was not eligible for deduction under section

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

section 80-IA of the Act. 64.1 However, the AO was of the view that no benefit of bad debts recovery can be granted by allowing deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that the amount of bad debt was recognized by the assessee when its unit was not eligible for deduction under section

MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation of Rs.5,96,48,062/- claimed by the assessee on plant and machinery (Dumper/Tipper) @ rate of 45% instead of 15%. (4) The Revenue craves leave to add/alter/armed and/or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal.” Ground Number 1: Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance of interest

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation of Rs.5,96,48,062/- claimed by the assessee on plant and machinery (Dumper/Tipper) @ rate of 45% instead of 15%. (4) The Revenue craves leave to add/alter/armed and/or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal.” Ground Number 1: Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance of interest

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE) -1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MAHALAXMI INFRACONTRACT LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation of Rs.5,96,48,062/- claimed by the assessee on plant and machinery (Dumper/Tipper) @ rate of 45% instead of 15%. (4) The Revenue craves leave to add/alter/armed and/or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal.” Ground Number 1: Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance of interest

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

depreciation and other common expenses in the ratio of Guwahati sales to total sales, assessee adopted a different method division only for employee benefit expenses, resulting in lower allocation to the eligible unit and thereby inflating profits of the 80-IE unit. The AO rejected the assessee’s methodology as inconsistent, and being insufficiently supported and based on unverifiable division