TORRENT ENERGY LIMITED (NOW MERGED WITH TORRENT POWER LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE 4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2011-12 Torrent Energy Limited The Acit, Cir.4(1)(1) (Now Merged With Torrent Power Ltd) Ahmedabad. Samanvay, 600, Tapovan Ambawadi, Ahmedabad Pan : Aacct 8570 B (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ar : Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

254 of the Act. 2 Facts of the Case 2. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the records, are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of generation and distribution of electricity. During the relevant previous year, the assessee had acquired leasehold rights over land admeasuring 65,434.33 square meters situated at Dahej

CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section 92C(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961('the Act') and confirmed an upward TP adjustment amounting to INR 16,79,093 on account of liaison services provided by Zydus Japan to the Appellant. (b) That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in making an addition of Rs.18

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

depreciation on goodwill. 6.6 Since the above amendments are applicable prospectively from the AY 2021-22, the appeal of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2012-13 is hereby allowed based on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aculife Healthcare Pvt Ltd Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 15 (supra) and judgment

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

depreciation on goodwill. 6.6 Since the above amendments are applicable prospectively from the AY 2021-22, the appeal of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2012-13 is hereby allowed based on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aculife Healthcare Pvt Ltd Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 15 (supra) and judgment

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

depreciation on goodwill. 6.6 Since the above amendments are applicable prospectively from the AY 2021-22, the appeal of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2012-13 is hereby allowed based on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aculife Healthcare Pvt Ltd Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 15 (supra) and judgment

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

depreciation on goodwill. 6.6 Since the above amendments are applicable prospectively from the AY 2021-22, the appeal of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2012-13 is hereby allowed based on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aculife Healthcare Pvt Ltd Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 15 (supra) and judgment

KANSARA POPATLAL TRIBHUVAN METAL PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground number 9 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

depreciation at rates provided under Income-tax Rules, action of Assessing Officer in redrawing profit and loss account and adopting rates prescribed under Companies Act, was totally unauthorized. 6.1 In view of the various decisions cited above, we are of the considered view that in the instant facts, PCIT erred in facts and law in holding that the assessment order

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-\n13 & 2013-14 filed by the assessee are partly allowed, while the appeal of the assessee\nfor AY 2014-15 is allowed

depreciation on\ngoodwill.\n6.6 Since the above amendments are applicable prospectively from the AY 2021-22,\nthe appeal of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2012-13 is hereby allowed based on\nthe judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aculife Healthcare Pvt Ltd\n(supra) and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court

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

Depreciation on Goodwill in pursuant to explanation to section 32(1),43(1) and 43(6) to the tune of Rs.1,13,10,975/-under normal provisions of the Act:- 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs 1,13,10,975/- made

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings, although not raised earlier. 3.5 From the above

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

In the result, Ground Nos

section 254(4). Under such circumstances, the fair proportion for disallowance of I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 13 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis depreciation

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

In the result, Ground Nos

section 254(4). Under such circumstances, the fair proportion for disallowance of I.T.A Nos. 3140/Ahd/2015 & 3093/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 13 DCIT vs. Unique Metropolis depreciation

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

depreciation of Rs. 2,66,83,892/-. 13.1. Ground of appeal no. 2 is dismissed. 14. Ground no. 3 of the assessee reads as under: 3. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 14,00,410/- computed by A.O. as per Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A(2) of the Act. Both the lower

UNIMED TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Unimed Technologies Limited Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Survey No.22 & 22, Vs. Vadodara. Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B Asstt.Year : 2016-17 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Unimed Technologies Limited Vadodara. Vs. Survey No.22 & 22, Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Assessee By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

254 (SC)], that such loss was capital in nature and not allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. The CIT(A) observed that the nature of the expenditure was clearly capital, as the payments related to acquisition of fixed assets from foreign suppliers. The assessee had suo motu offered an amount of Rs.20

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, RACE COURSE vs. UNIMED TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, HALOL

Accordingly dismissed.\n18.9 Based on the findings and conclusions set out hereinabove, the\nappeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by\nthe assessee is partly allowed

254 (SC)], that such\nloss was capital in nature and not allowable as a deduction under section\n37(1) of the Act. The CIT(A) observed that the nature of the expenditure was\nclearly capital, as the payments related to acquisition of fixed assets from\nforeign suppliers. The assessee had suo motu offered an amount of\nRs.20

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

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases Rs. 51.712/- : 5.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in disallowing purchases made from M/s M.R. Corporation and M/s Savita International as bogus purchases based

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

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases Rs. 51.712/- : 5.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in disallowing purchases made from M/s M.R. Corporation and M/s Savita International as bogus purchases based

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

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) on such capital expenditure disallowed. 5. Re: Disallowance on account of alleged Bogus Purchases Rs. 51.712/- : 5.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in disallowing purchases made from M/s M.R. Corporation and M/s Savita International as bogus purchases based