THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

depreciation claimed on goodwill amounting to Rs.227,92,50,000/- had been rightly allowed by the CIT(A) in accordance with law and settled judicial precedents. The AR submitted that the goodwill had arisen pursuant to a scheme of amalgamation between the assessee and its wholly owned subsidiary (ILPL), which was duly sanctioned by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court

THE ARVIND LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 862/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2007-2008 Arvind Ltd.(Earlier Known As Arvind A.C.I.T., Mills Ltd.), Vs. Circle-1, Naroda Road, Ahmedabad. Naroda, Ahmedabad.

depreciation can be carried forward from the de-merged company to the resulting company. ii. Neither the companies nor the shareholders are subject to capital gains tax. iii. Expenses incurred wholly for the purpose of de-merger are allowed as a deduction in five annual instalments being 20 per cent in each year. 11.4 The above benefits, however, will

THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. M/S. KALPARATRU POWER TRANSMISSION LIMITED,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

391/- made on short term advance to its overseas subsidiaries is held justified and is hereby confirmed. Relevant ground of appeal is rejected. 8. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the contentions made before the lower authorities that the impugned advances were in the nature of quasi equity capital since they were given to the subsidiaries which

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

391/- made on short term advance to its overseas subsidiaries is held justified and is hereby confirmed. Relevant ground of appeal is rejected. 8. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the contentions made before the lower authorities that the impugned advances were in the nature of quasi equity capital since they were given to the subsidiaries which

KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

391/- made on short term advance to its overseas subsidiaries is held justified and is hereby confirmed. Relevant ground of appeal is rejected. 8. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the contentions made before the lower authorities that the impugned advances were in the nature of quasi equity capital since they were given to the subsidiaries which

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

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1),, VADODARA vs. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER &\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

391 760\n(Assessee)\nPAN: AAACG8588 L\nThe DCIT\nCircle-4(1), Baroda\nThe Income Tax\nOfficer\nWard-4(1)\nBaroda\n(Revenue)\n2.\n2007/Ahd/2007\n2004-05\n-do-Revenue\nBy Assessee\n3.\n1619/Ahd/2008\n2005-06\nBy Assessee\n4.\n1382/Ahd/2009\n2003-04\n-do-Revenue\nBy Assessee\n5.\n1383/Ahd/2009\n2006-07\n-do-Revenue\nBy Assessee\nAssessee by: Ms. Amrin

M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(1),, BARODA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

391 760 (Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAACG8588 L 2007/Ahd/2007 2. 2004-05 The DCIT By Assessee Circle-4(1),Baroda 1619/Ahd/2008 3. 2005-06 -do-Revenue By Assessee 4. 1382/Ahd/2009 2003-04 -do-Revenue By Assessee 1383/Ahd/2009 5. 2006-07 -do-Revenue By Assessee Assessee by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

391 760 (Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAACG8588 L 2007/Ahd/2007 2. 2004-05 The DCIT By Assessee Circle-4(1),Baroda 1619/Ahd/2008 3. 2005-06 -do-Revenue By Assessee 4. 1382/Ahd/2009 2003-04 -do-Revenue By Assessee 1383/Ahd/2009 5. 2006-07 -do-Revenue By Assessee Assessee by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

391 760 (Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAACG8588 L 2007/Ahd/2007 2. 2004-05 The DCIT By Assessee Circle-4(1),Baroda 1619/Ahd/2008 3. 2005-06 -do-Revenue By Assessee 4. 1382/Ahd/2009 2003-04 -do-Revenue By Assessee 1383/Ahd/2009 5. 2006-07 -do-Revenue By Assessee Assessee by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

391 760 (Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAACG8588 L 2007/Ahd/2007 2. 2004-05 The DCIT By Assessee Circle-4(1),Baroda 1619/Ahd/2008 3. 2005-06 -do-Revenue By Assessee 4. 1382/Ahd/2009 2003-04 -do-Revenue By Assessee 1383/Ahd/2009 5. 2006-07 -do-Revenue By Assessee Assessee by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date

SHALBY LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.793/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15)

depreciation can be set off and carried forward only in the case of an Industrial Undertaking or a Hotel or a Ship. Further, the expression “industrial undertaking: is defined in clause (assessee) of sub-section (7) of section 72A of the IT Act. The learned Principal CIT was of the view that in the present case there was no industrial

THE DCIT ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ),, AHMEDABAD vs. BLACK PEARL SERVICES LIMITED, G.S.E.C. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2813-2815/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 To 2013-14 The D.C.I.T, Black Pearl Services Limited, (International Taxation), Vs. 2Nd Floor, Gujarat Chamber Of Ahmedabad Commerce Building, ‘’Sangram.’’ Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaecb1176H

depreciation on oil rig claimed by the assessee was allowed by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Thus the interest expenses on the money borrowed for the purchase of such oil rig has direct nexuses with the business operation carried out by the assessee. Therefore the ITA nos.2813-2815/AHD/2017 Asstt. Years 2011-12 to 2013-14 7 same is eligible

THE DCIT ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ),, AHMEDABAD vs. BLACK PEARL SERVICES LIMITED, G.S.E.C. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2813-2815/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 To 2013-14 The D.C.I.T, Black Pearl Services Limited, (International Taxation), Vs. 2Nd Floor, Gujarat Chamber Of Ahmedabad Commerce Building, ‘’Sangram.’’ Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaecb1176H

depreciation on oil rig claimed by the assessee was allowed by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Thus the interest expenses on the money borrowed for the purchase of such oil rig has direct nexuses with the business operation carried out by the assessee. Therefore the ITA nos.2813-2815/AHD/2017 Asstt. Years 2011-12 to 2013-14 7 same is eligible

THE DCIT ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ),, AHMEDABAD vs. BLACK PEARL SERVICES LIMITED, G.S.E.C. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2813-2815/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 To 2013-14 The D.C.I.T, Black Pearl Services Limited, (International Taxation), Vs. 2Nd Floor, Gujarat Chamber Of Ahmedabad Commerce Building, ‘’Sangram.’’ Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaecb1176H

depreciation on oil rig claimed by the assessee was allowed by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Thus the interest expenses on the money borrowed for the purchase of such oil rig has direct nexuses with the business operation carried out by the assessee. Therefore the ITA nos.2813-2815/AHD/2017 Asstt. Years 2011-12 to 2013-14 7 same is eligible

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXA-1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. These factual aspects were not disputed by the Ld. DR in the present Assessment Years as well. Thus, Ground No. 5 is allowed. 19. As regards to Ground Nos. 6 and 6.1, disallowance of weighted deduction under Section 35 (1)(ii) of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXA-1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. These factual aspects were not disputed by the Ld. DR in the present Assessment Years as well. Thus, Ground No. 5 is allowed. 19. As regards to Ground Nos. 6 and 6.1, disallowance of weighted deduction under Section 35 (1)(ii) of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE(INT.TAXN.)-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. These factual aspects were not disputed by the Ld. DR in the present Assessment Years as well. Thus, Ground No. 5 is allowed. 19. As regards to Ground Nos. 6 and 6.1, disallowance of weighted deduction under Section 35 (1)(ii) of the Act, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

391 to 394 of Companies Act, 1956 vide order dated 03.05.2013 in Company claim Petition No. 283 of 2013 and also by the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court vide order dated 03.05.2013 [pages 679 to 682 of the Paper Book] in Company Petition No. 31 of 2013 connected with the Company Application No. 373 of 2012. The assets received