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

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), 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

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. The CIT(A) also noted that the SLP filed by the Department against Zydus Wellness Ltd. was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, giving finality to the issue. 47. On the question of cost, the CIT(A) rightly held that the goodwill arose as a result of an actual transaction supported by a court-sanctioned scheme

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

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

48,15,82,353/- by restricting the deduction under section 80IC of the Act to Rs.33,07,09,509/- as against Rs.81,22,91,862/- claimed in the return of income, made by AO. ITA No.1245/Ahd/2025 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd. 3 d) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

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

48,15,82,353/- by restricting the deduction under section 80IC of the Act to Rs.33,07,09,509/- as against Rs.81,22,91,862/- claimed in the return of income, made by AO. ITA No.1245/Ahd/2025 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd. 3 d) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

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

48,15,82,353/- by restricting the deduction under section 80IC of the Act to Rs.33,07,09,509/- as against Rs.81,22,91,862/- claimed in the return of income, made by AO. ITA No.1245/Ahd/2025 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd. 3 d) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

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

48,15,82,353/- by restricting the deduction under section 80IC of the Act to Rs.33,07,09,509/- as against Rs.81,22,91,862/- claimed in the return of income, made by AO. ITA No.1245/Ahd/2025 and 3 Others DCIT Vs. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd. 3 d) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

DAKSHIN GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE PR. CIT-1,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Years : 2015-16 Dakshin Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd., Pri. Commissioner Of Urja Sadan, Nana Varachha Road, Vs Income-Tax-1, Kapodara Char Rasta, Surat, Ahmedabad Guajrat-395006 Pan : Aabcd 8912 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R

depreciation loss to the extent of Rs.59,86,49,724/-. In the said return, book profit under Section 115JB of the Act was declared by the assessee at Rs.98,48

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

48 ITD 202 where it was held as under: Section 145 deals with two situations : (a) where the method of accounting is faulty, and (b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

48 ITD 202 where it was held as under: Section 145 deals with two situations : (a) where the method of accounting is faulty, and (b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

48 ITD 202 where it was held as under: Section 145 deals with two situations : (a) where the method of accounting is faulty, and (b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

48 ITD 202 where it was held as under: Section 145 deals with two situations : (a) where the method of accounting is faulty, and (b) where the accounts are not correct or complete. In the case of the former, the Assessing Officer is empowered to compute the income upon such basis and in such manner as he may determine

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 41(1) has no application to non payment of disputed amount. It be so held now. 4 Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance made by AO of Rs. 1,14,999/- depreciation claimed with respect to closed unit. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have deleted disallowance of depreciation claimed of unit forming part

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 41(1) has no application to non payment of disputed amount. It be so held now. 4 Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance made by AO of Rs. 1,14,999/- depreciation claimed with respect to closed unit. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have deleted disallowance of depreciation claimed of unit forming part

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 32(1) it is compulsory for the AO to allow depreciation whether claimed or not in I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 40 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT the computation of total income. In view of the statutory provisions the AO was not correct in not allowing the additional depreciation claim made

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 32(1) it is compulsory for the AO to allow depreciation whether claimed or not in I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 40 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT the computation of total income. In view of the statutory provisions the AO was not correct in not allowing the additional depreciation claim made

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

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 32(1) it is compulsory for the AO to allow depreciation whether claimed or not in I.T.A No. 2471 & 2853/Ahd/2017 & Ors. A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 Page No 40 Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. . vs. DCIT the computation of total income. In view of the statutory provisions the AO was not correct in not allowing the additional depreciation claim made

MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED,VADODARA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

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

48,484/- towards additional depreciation by giving the detailed reason that assessee company is not eligible to claim additional depreciation as it is engaged only in distribution of electricity. Further as per section