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

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

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN ANAGRAM STOCK BROKING LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation and secondly by way of claiming the deduction of the original cost of acquisition of the membership card under Section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. But the issue before us is limited to the cost of acquisition of the membership card as provided under section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. As per this section, the original cost

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation and secondly by way of claiming the deduction of the original cost of acquisition of the membership card under Section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. But the issue before us is limited to the cost of acquisition of the membership card as provided under section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. As per this section, the original cost

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD. ( AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

depreciation and secondly by way of claiming the deduction of the original cost of acquisition of the membership card under Section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. But the issue before us is limited to the cost of acquisition of the membership card as provided under section 55(2)(ab) of the Act. As per this section, the original cost

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

GUJARAT ALKALIES & CHEMICALS LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

section 263 on the two points (i.e. additional depreciation on windmill and verification with respect to claim of expenditure) and the relevant directions of the learned Commissioner were as follows:- “3. I have considered the submission of the assessee and also the facts available on record. In respect of claim of additional of Rs.38,62,288

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 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

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. AMOL DICALITE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 539/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1246/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, Amol Dicalite Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 301, Akshay, 53, Ahmedabad Shirmali Society Navrangpura, Ahmedabad

288 ITR 408 (SC), wherein, while interpreting the provisions of s. 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act, the Supreme Court held as under (p. 444): 'Sec. 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act states that 'a person who is a non-resident, where the fees are payable in respect of services utilized in a business or profession carried

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AMOL DICALITE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 539/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1246/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 The D.C.I.T, Amol Dicalite Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 301, Akshay, 53, Ahmedabad Shirmali Society Navrangpura, Ahmedabad

288 ITR 408 (SC), wherein, while interpreting the provisions of s. 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act, the Supreme Court held as under (p. 444): 'Sec. 9(1)(vii)(c) of the Act states that 'a person who is a non-resident, where the fees are payable in respect of services utilized in a business or profession carried