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 is at higher valuation of existing assets and thereby why not this process be considered as Revaluation of existing assets? ITA No.281 and 222/Ahd/2021 8 9. Whether the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.10,19,24,003/- on account of disallowance of adjustment relating to allocation

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

section 32 of the Act. 8.11 The purpose for the depreciation on the intangible assets has been explained in the memorandum of the finance Act to 1998, and there was no such limitation provided for the allowability of the depreciation on technical know-how. Therefore we are not inclined to uphold the finding of the AO that the depreciation

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:-

depreciation thereon, has revalued the intangibles to the extent of creation of Goodwill in the books of accounts. This process of revaluation of intangibles, thus, allowed the assessee to claim that the nature of amalgamation is "Amalgamation in the nature of purchase" and not "Amalgamation in the nature of merger". 10) Whether on the facts and the circumstances

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

394]: Section 28(1), read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act^ 1961 – Business income - Chargeable as (Carbon credit) - Assessment year 2009-10-Whether since carbon credit was generated out of environmental concerns and it was not having character of trading activity, receipt from sale of carbon credit was capital receipt and not business income - Held, yes [Para

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

394]: Section 28(1), read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act^ 1961 – Business income - Chargeable as (Carbon credit) - Assessment year 2009-10-Whether since carbon credit was generated out of environmental concerns and it was not having character of trading activity, receipt from sale of carbon credit was capital receipt and not business income - Held, yes [Para

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

394]: Section 28(1), read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act^ 1961 – Business income - Chargeable as (Carbon credit) - Assessment year 2009-10-Whether since carbon credit was generated out of environmental concerns and it was not having character of trading activity, receipt from sale of carbon credit was capital receipt and not business income - Held, yes [Para

M/S. SURZLON GLOBAL SERVICES LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 67-68/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-2018 M/S. Suzlon Global Services Limited, Principal Commissioner 5 Suzlon, Shrimali Society, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Near Shree Krishna Centre, Ahmedabad. Nr. Judges Bunglow Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aaics1406R

depreciation for ₹ 179.85 crores with respect to the goodwill generated to it in the scheme of amalgamation as discussed above subject to the time limit as specified under section 263 of the Act. The time as specified under section 263(2) of the Act is for 2 years from the end of financial year in which intimation under section

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD),, GANDHINAGAR vs. KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad1. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1462/Ahd/2016 2.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1463/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively)

394 (Kar). The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. My Home Power Ltd., (2014) 46 taxmann.com 314 (AP). Apart from the above, he further contended that w.e.f. 1-4-2018, a special provision has been enacted in the shape of section 115BBG

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD),, GANDHINAGAR vs. KALPATARU POWER TRANSMISSION LTD.,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad1. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1462/Ahd/2016 2.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1463/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively)

394 (Kar). The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. My Home Power Ltd., (2014) 46 taxmann.com 314 (AP). Apart from the above, he further contended that w.e.f. 1-4-2018, a special provision has been enacted in the shape of section 115BBG

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

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 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

394 ITR 483, the Court referred to the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd., (supra) as well as the addition of third proviso to clause (in) of sub-section 1 of Section 32 of the Act and observed as under:- "10.1: The plain language of section 3201 Gia) read along with relevant proviso would have

N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

394 ITR 483, the Court referred to the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd., (supra) as well as the addition of third proviso to clause (in) of sub-section 1 of Section 32 of the Act and observed as under:- "10.1: The plain language of section 3201 Gia) read along with relevant proviso would have

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

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

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

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 by 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)

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 by the assessee

THE JT. CIT(EXEMPTION)(OSD), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD vs. DIVYA JYOTI TRUST, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Waseem Ahmed & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Jt.Cit (Exemptions)(Osd) Divya Jyoti Trust Cir.2, Ahmedabad. Vs Tejas Eye Hospital Suthar Faliyaat & Post – Mandvi Surat 394 610. Pan : Aabtd 3401 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Jagirdar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 7.6.2019 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-9/10321/Dcit(E), Cir.2-/17-18Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] Relating To The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

394 610. PAN : AABTD 3401 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ketan Jagirdar, AR Revenue by : Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 17/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order dated

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

sections 391 and 394 of\nthe Companies Act, 1956, whereby several associate and\nsubsidiary companies were amalgamated with the assessee with\neffect from 01.04.2014. In the same scheme, the Healthcare\nDivision of the assessee was demerged and transferred to Aculife\nHealthcare Pvt. Ltd. with effect from 01.10.2014.\n3. For the Assessment Year 2015–16, the assessee filed its\noriginal return

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

sections 391 and 394 of\nthe Companies Act, 1956, whereby several associate and\nsubsidiary companies were amalgamated with the assessee with\neffect from 01.04.2014. In the same scheme, the Healthcare\nDivision of the assessee was demerged and transferred to Aculife\nHealthcare Pvt. Ltd. with effect from 01.10.2014.\n3. For the Assessment Year 2015–16, the assessee filed its\noriginal return