THE DCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. V. F. ARVIND BRANDS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and the CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1904/Ahd/2013 & Cross Objection No. 204/Ahd/2013 (In Ita No.1904/Ahd/2013) िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T.(Osd), M/S. V. F. Arvind Brands Pvt. Circle-8, Vs. Ltd. Ahmedabad. Arvind Mills Premises, Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025. Pan: Aaccv 2727 L (Applicant) (Responent) / Cross Objector

250/- Technical Knowhow 2. Vendor Relationship 24,05,52,000/- 25% 6,01,38,000/- Customer 18,15,75,000/- 25% 4,53,93,750/- 3. Relationship Total 72,45,84,000/- 25% 18,14,46,000/- However, the AO was not satisfied with the claim of the depreciation of the assessee in respect of the above assets

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst. Commissioner Of M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax, Corporate House, S.G. Highway, Central Circle 2(3), Nr. Sola Bridge, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380 054 [Pan : Aaaci 5120 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit (Dr) Respondent Represented By: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble:-

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds:- “1) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the upward adjustment

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BODAL CHEMICAL LTD., AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

250 on 04.09.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 by CIT(A)- 11, Ahmedabad confirming the disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill of Rs.1,13,10,975/- and not adjudicating the ground of appeal relating to addition of Rs.40,76,854/- towards unutilized CENVAT credit is wholly illegal, ulawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred

BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

250 on 04.09.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 by CIT(A)- 11, Ahmedabad confirming the disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill of Rs.1,13,10,975/- and not adjudicating the ground of appeal relating to addition of Rs.40,76,854/- towards unutilized CENVAT credit is wholly illegal, ulawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred

M/S. BODAL CHEMICAL LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADD.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

250 on 04.09.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 by CIT(A)- 11, Ahmedabad confirming the disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill of Rs.1,13,10,975/- and not adjudicating the ground of appeal relating to addition of Rs.40,76,854/- towards unutilized CENVAT credit is wholly illegal, ulawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred

BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

250 on 04.09.2018 for A.Y. 2009-10 by CIT(A)- 11, Ahmedabad confirming the disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill of Rs.1,13,10,975/- and not adjudicating the ground of appeal relating to addition of Rs.40,76,854/- towards unutilized CENVAT credit is wholly illegal, ulawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld.CIT(A) has grievously erred

M/S. BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals being IT(SS)A No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

250, has directed Ld. AO to delete such addition made under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.1,80,634 based on the fact that assessee had sufficient interest free funds during the year and had earned exempt dividend income of Rs.1,12,350/- only. Further, the CIT(A) has placed reliance on the decision in the case

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

6. Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act as it stood at the relevant time, read as follows: "32. Depreciation: (1) In respect of depreciation of - .... (iia) In the case of any new machinery or plant (other than ships and aircraft), which has been acquired and installed after the 31st day of March, 2005, by an assessee engaged

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

6. Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act as it stood at the relevant time, read as follows: "32. Depreciation: (1) In respect of depreciation of - .... (iia) In the case of any new machinery or plant (other than ships and aircraft), which has been acquired and installed after the 31st day of March, 2005, by an assessee engaged

SHRI JITENDRA NARSINHBHAI TALPADA,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-6(1) Shri Jitendra Narsinhbhai Talpada53, Vadodara. Atmajyotinagar Society Vs. Nr. Tejas Vidyalaya, Ellora Park Vadodara 390 023. Pan : Aagpt 2465 A (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deelipkumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020

depreciation of Rs.4,31,466/- from this hospital, and thus, net rental income has been computed in negative i.e. Rs.(-)3,23,466/-. This income has been set off against the salary income, and gross total income at Rs.5,63,251/- was shown by the assessee. 4. Two issues arose in the assessment proceedings viz. whether the income from

SHRI JITENDRA NARSINHBHAI TALPADA,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-6(1) Shri Jitendra Narsinhbhai Talpada53, Vadodara. Atmajyotinagar Society Vs. Nr. Tejas Vidyalaya, Ellora Park Vadodara 390 023. Pan : Aagpt 2465 A (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deelipkumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020

depreciation of Rs.4,31,466/- from this hospital, and thus, net rental income has been computed in negative i.e. Rs.(-)3,23,466/-. This income has been set off against the salary income, and gross total income at Rs.5,63,251/- was shown by the assessee. 4. Two issues arose in the assessment proceedings viz. whether the income from

BHARGAVKUMAR PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

250(6)_of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) ,dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the intimation /order of the Assessing Officer (AO)/CPC, Bangalore, passed under section 143(1) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year2023-24. 2. Ld. counsel for the assessees submitted that the issues raised in both appeals are identical, pertaining

ARUN GOPILAL SAMNANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2023-24 Arun Gopilal Samnani The I.T.O., Ward-5(3)(1) 7, Bank Of Baroda Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. P.T. College Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aywps 2887 D Assessment Year :2023-24 Bhargavkumarparsottambh The I.T.O., Ward-1(2)(1) Ai Patel-Huf Vs Ahmedabad. B/301, 3Rd Floor Shree Saran-2 Opp: Anand Niketan School Thaltej, Ahmedabad 380089. Pan : Aalhb 2685 R

250(6)_of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) ,dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the intimation /order of the Assessing Officer (AO)/CPC, Bangalore, passed under section 143(1) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year2023-24. 2. Ld. counsel for the assessees submitted that the issues raised in both appeals are identical, pertaining

JT. CTI (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

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

section 43 of the Act. The AO accordingly treated the subsidy received by the assessee as revenue receipt and added to the total income of the assessee. 60. On appeal by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: 6.4 It is seen that addition made on account of sales

M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

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

section 43 of the Act. The AO accordingly treated the subsidy received by the assessee as revenue receipt and added to the total income of the assessee. 60. On appeal by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: 6.4 It is seen that addition made on account of sales

THE DCIT, CIR-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

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

section 43 of the Act. The AO accordingly treated the subsidy received by the assessee as revenue receipt and added to the total income of the assessee. 60. On appeal by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: 6.4 It is seen that addition made on account of sales

NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

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

section 43 of the Act. The AO accordingly treated the subsidy received by the assessee as revenue receipt and added to the total income of the assessee. 60. On appeal by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: 6.4 It is seen that addition made on account of sales

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2012–13, 2013–14, 2020–21, and 2022–23. Since common issues of facts and law are involved, primarily relating to allowability of depreciation on goodwill and treatment of product registration expenditure, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2012–13, 2013–14, 2020–21, and 2022–23. Since common issues of facts and law are involved, primarily relating to allowability of depreciation on goodwill and treatment of product registration expenditure, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake