DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, GURGAON

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which allows depreciation on intangible assets such as know-how, patents, trademarks, licences, and commercial rights of similar nature, provided they are: • acquired by the assessee, • owned, wholly or partly, • and used for the purposes of business. 5.7 In the present case, the AO concluded that: • No asset was acquired by RBHIL

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

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which allows depreciation on intangible assets such as know-how, patents, trademarks, licences, and commercial rights of similar nature, provided they are: • acquired by the assessee, • owned, wholly or partly, • and used for the purposes of business. 5.7 In the present case, the AO concluded that: • No asset was acquired by RBHIL

INOX LEISURE LTD.,BARODA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, BARODA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, its subsidiary named Fame India Ltd was amalgamated into Inox as per Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat order dated 12th March, 2013 w.e.f. 1st April, 2012. Pursuant to the scheme, shareholder of erstwhile Fame were entitled to 5 shares of Inox for every 8 shares held by them in Fame

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

288 ITR 1 (SC), that interest\non borrowed capital is allowable under section 36(1)(iii) if the assessee is\nable to demonstrate that the funds have been advanced to a sister concern\nor a third party as a measure of commercial expediency. The expression\n\"commercial expediency\" has been judicially interpreted to encompass such\nadvances as are motivated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

depreciation is nil; or] AY: 2006-07 (iv ) the amount of profits eligible for deduction under section 80HHC , computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c ) of sub-section (3) or sub- section (3A), as the case may be, of that section, and subject to the conditions specified in that section; or (v ) the amount of profits eligible

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPN. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

depreciation is nil; or] AY: 2006-07 (iv ) the amount of profits eligible for deduction under section 80HHC , computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c ) of sub-section (3) or sub- section (3A), as the case may be, of that section, and subject to the conditions specified in that section; or (v ) the amount of profits eligible

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

288 ITR 1 (SC), that interest\non borrowed capital is allowable under section 36(1)(iii) if the assessee is\nable to demonstrate that the funds have been advanced to a sister concern\nor a third party as a measure of commercial expediency. The expression\n\"commercial expediency\" has been judicially interpreted to encompass such\nadvances as are motivated

JAYBHOLE COLD STORAGE,ARAVALI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

288, before the specified date referred to in section 44AB and the assessee furnishes by that date the report of such audit in the prescribed form duly signed and verified by such accountant.” 16. Accordingly, on going through the relevant provisions, it is evident that filing of requisite form for claiming deduction under Section 35AD in terms

SHREEJI COLD STORAGE,ARAVALI vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

288, before the specified date referred to in section 44AB and the assessee furnishes by that date the report of such audit in the prescribed form duly signed and verified by such accountant.” 16. Accordingly, on going through the relevant provisions, it is evident that filing of requisite form for claiming deduction under Section 35AD in terms

J vs. INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,VADODARAVS.THE PR. CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

288 before the specified date referred to in section 44AB indicating the computation of the net worth of the undertaking or division , as the case may be and certifying that the net worth of the undertaking or division as the case may be has been correctly arrived at in accordance with the provisions of law. 12.5 However

JMC-MSKE(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Us & That These Four

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an undertaking, any machinery or plant

BGSCTPL- MSKEL (JV),AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Us & That These Four

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an undertaking, any machinery or plant

BGSCTPL- MSKEL CONSORTIUM,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Us & That These Four

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an undertaking, any machinery or plant

JMC-MSKE(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Us & That These Four

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an undertaking, any machinery or plant

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee. Explanation 2.—Where in the case of an 46[undertaking], any machinery or plant

THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA vs. PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD., VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

288 ITR 1 (SC), that interest\non borrowed capital is allowable under section 36(1)(iii) if the assessee is\nable to demonstrate that the funds have been advanced to a sister concern\nor a third party as a measure of commercial expediency. The expression\n\"commercial expediency\" has been judicially interpreted to encompass such\nadvances as are motivated