NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ACIT.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 234B and 234D and withdrawing interest u/s 244A under the Act. You appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 47. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 234B and 234D and withdrawing interest u/s 244A under the Act. You appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 47. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 234B and 234D and withdrawing interest u/s 244A under the Act. You appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 47. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

THE ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

section 234B and 234D and withdrawing interest u/s 244A under the Act. You appellant prays for leave to add to alter and/or to amend any of the grounds before the final hearing of the appeal.” 47. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

244A of the Act amounting to Rs.19,32,350/-. The Assessing Officer made disallowance under Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act amounting to Rs.64,67,783/-. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.38,840/ in respect of Section 2(24)(x) of the Act relating to the late payment of PF/ESIC payment. The Assessing Officer assessed the income

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

244A of the Act amounting to Rs.19,32,350/-. The Assessing Officer made disallowance under Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act amounting to Rs.64,67,783/-. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.38,840/ in respect of Section 2(24)(x) of the Act relating to the late payment of PF/ESIC payment. The Assessing Officer assessed the income

BUNDY INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed in part

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

depreciation. 8.1 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the facts of the case that the aforesaid jigs and fixtures are made specifically for individual customer and would become useless if there is change in customer requirement. 8.2 The learned CIT(A) also failed to appreciate the facts of the case that the useful life of the jigs and fixtures

VEER PLASTICS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT -4, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation u/s. 32(1)(iia) for a sum of Rs.6,41,37,291/- and (iii) alleged non-inclusion of interest u/s. 244A of Rs. 4,83,616/- on the income tax refund which has already been included in total income assessed by AO; in utter disregard to the fact that in the course of original assessment proceedings

SABARMATI GAS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

sections of pipelines, becomes integral part of Grid. The learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the Gas to the customer can be supplied only after pipeline is tested, commissioned and added to the pipeline network. It is a settled position of law that once asset is commissioned & put to use in business, depreciation is admissible. I.T.A

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD),, GANDHINAGAR vs. SABARMATI GAS LIMITED,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

sections of pipelines, becomes integral part of Grid. The learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the Gas to the customer can be supplied only after pipeline is tested, commissioned and added to the pipeline network. It is a settled position of law that once asset is commissioned & put to use in business, depreciation is admissible. I.T.A

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

244A of Rs 3.64.11.732), instead of the only adjustment required to the extent of the tax refund amount of Rs 30,34,31,139/-. ITA No. 392/Ahd/2023 [Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2017-18 - 4 – 14. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in mechanically initiating Penalty Proceedings u/s 270A

PARIMAL CHANDRAKANT ZAVERI,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

244A thereby assessed the total income at Rs. 98,41,250/-. 3.1. Perusal of the above assessment order by the Ld. PCIT, the assessee had sold a residential flats in Mumbai on 20.12.2014 for a consideration of Rs. 2.66 crores jointly with others and assesee’s 20% share was Rs. 53,20,000/-. The assessee has not offered the long