DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowance of Rs 13,84,895 was deleted. The Assessing Officer is aggrieved of the relief so granted by the CIT(A) and is in appeal before us. ITA No.285/Ahd/2020 with C.O No.81/Ahd/2020 and 5 others A.Y. 2013-14 & Ors. 142. Having heard the rival contentions, and having perused the material on record, we find that this issue is also

THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowance of Rs 13,84,895 was deleted. The Assessing Officer is aggrieved of the relief so granted by the CIT(A) and is in appeal before us. ITA No.285/Ahd/2020 with C.O No.81/Ahd/2020 and 5 others A.Y. 2013-14 & Ors. 142. Having heard the rival contentions, and having perused the material on record, we find that this issue is also

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowance of Rs 13,84,895 was deleted. The Assessing Officer is aggrieved of the relief so granted by the CIT(A) and is in appeal before us. ITA No.285/Ahd/2020 with C.O No.81/Ahd/2020 and 5 others A.Y. 2013-14 & Ors. 142. Having heard the rival contentions, and having perused the material on record, we find that this issue is also

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedasstt. Sr.No.

145A of the Act. being unutilized CENVAT credit. ITA No.2030/Ahd/2016 and 3 others A.Y. 2011-12 19 (8) That the ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 73,533/- made on account of disallowance of Aircraft Hire Charges. (9) That the ld.C!T(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting

HAGGLUNDS DRIVES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ( NOW MERGED IN BOSCH REXROTH (INDIA) LTD.),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowing devaluation of inventory amounting to Rs. 1,40,79,555. While making this addition the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts on the following: i. in disregarding the stock valuation made by the Appellant as per AS 2 and section 145A

BOSCH REXROTH (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowing devaluation of inventory amounting to Rs. 1,40,79,555. While making this addition the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts on the following: i. in disregarding the stock valuation made by the Appellant as per AS 2 and section 145A

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,(OSD),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL. CIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

THE DCIT(OSD) RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CORRTECH INTERNATIONAL PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.8,74,323/- (f) Interest on diversion of funds Rs.10,95,150/- (g) Land Restoration expenses Rs.1,07,375/- (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to substantiate the reasons for making wrong claim in the returned income in terms of Clause (B) to Explanation 1 of Section

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

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.688/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd., D.C.I.T., Near Ipcl Complex, Circle-1(1), Vs. Baroda-390007. P.O Petrochemicals, At Ranoli, Dist. Baroda-391346. Pan: Aaacg8896M आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.937/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T, Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd., Circle-1(1), Near Ipcl Complex, Vs. Baroda-390007. P.O Petrochemicals, At Ranoli, Dist. Baroda-391346. Pan: Aaacg8896M

section 145A of the Act in the given facts & circumstances. In view of the above, we do not concur with the view of the Ld. CIT(A) and accordingly reverse the same. The AO accordingly is directed to delete the addition made by him. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 19. The next issue raised

THE DCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT CABLES LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

145A of the Act. 4. In response to the same the assessee vide its letter dated 12-01-13 has submitted as under. ITA Nos. 1293/Ahd/14, 2409/Ahd/15 3 & ITA No. 564/Ahd/2017 . A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 "Your good selves have asked the assessee company to explain. whether MODVAT/CENVAT have been included in valuing the closing stock

CRYSTAL QUINONE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & M/S. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1420/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बनाम/ Crystal Quinone Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Cir-1(1)(2), Opp. Old Excise Chawky, Vs. Ahmedabad S.M. Road, Ahmedabad

section 14A read with rule 8D of Income Tax Rules. Thus we confirm the disallowance of the administrative expenses made by the authorities below. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 26. The next issue raised by the assessee is that Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance made