SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act can be made for that year. Such an interpretation is not in line with the intention of the Legislature. To illustrate, if during a previous year, an assessee incurs an expense of Rs. 1 lakh to earn non-exempt income of Rs. 1.5 lakh and also incurs an expense

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act can be made for that year. Such an interpretation is not in line with the intention of the Legislature. To illustrate, if during a previous year, an assessee incurs an expense of Rs. 1 lakh to earn non-exempt income of Rs. 1.5 lakh and also incurs an expense

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowance of depreciation must be restricted only building and further Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the lease qualifies ad “operating lease”, and in the order Ld. CIT(A) has not given any sound reason or basis as to why such long term lease for the effective economic life of the assets, should qualify as “operating lease

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowance of depreciation must be restricted only building and further Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the lease qualifies ad “operating lease”, and in the order Ld. CIT(A) has not given any sound reason or basis as to why such long term lease for the effective economic life of the assets, should qualify as “operating lease

THE ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowance of depreciation must be restricted only building and further Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the lease qualifies ad “operating lease”, and in the order Ld. CIT(A) has not given any sound reason or basis as to why such long term lease for the effective economic life of the assets, should qualify as “operating lease

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ACIT.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowance of depreciation must be restricted only building and further Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the lease qualifies ad “operating lease”, and in the order Ld. CIT(A) has not given any sound reason or basis as to why such long term lease for the effective economic life of the assets, should qualify as “operating lease

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 40 A(3) the alternate plea raised by the appellant has not been adjudicated upon. In my opinion the case of live stock exporter is on much more stronger looting than that of a dealer in meat. ITA Nos.1115 & 962/Ahd/2019 & CO No.10/Ahd/2022(in ITA No. 1115/A/19) Asst. Years –2012-13 & 2014-15 10.6 Further, remand report as submitted

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. MOHAMMEDARIF IBRAHIMBHAI SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 40 A(3) the alternate plea raised by the appellant has not been adjudicated upon. In my opinion the case of live stock exporter is on much more stronger looting than that of a dealer in meat. ITA Nos.1115 & 962/Ahd/2019 & CO No.10/Ahd/2022(in ITA No. 1115/A/19) Asst. Years –2012-13 & 2014-15 10.6 Further, remand report as submitted

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of deduction under section 80-IE of the Act in Sikkim Unit on other incomes. 60. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee has claimed deduction of profit derived from Sikkim Unit under section 80-IE of the Act. As per the AO, there were certain incomes considered by the assessee eligible for deduction under section

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

disallowing the deduction under section 80-IA of the Act. 69. The learned CIT (A) disregarded the contention of the assessee by observing that the impugned income does not have nexus with the distribution of power activity of the assessee. Thus the learned CIT (A) upheld the finding of the AO. 70. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHAVANAGAR vs. M/S. JIYA ECO-PRODUSTS LIMITED,, BHAVANGAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction under Section 80JJA ITA Nos. 192, 193 & 263 /Ahd/2020 ACIT Vs. Jiya Eco-Products

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHAVANAGAR vs. M/S. JIYA ECO-PRODUSTS LIMITED,, BHAVANGAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction under Section 80JJA ITA Nos. 192, 193 & 263 /Ahd/2020 ACIT Vs. Jiya Eco-Products

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CLP INDIA PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income), as the revenue has not been accepted the said decision and has preferred an SLP against the said decision. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in view of the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2022 to Section

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

193 ITR 321 (SC). 3.3 if is submitted that section 43D charge have inbuilt mandatory check that the specified interest income in sticky/NPA loans could be charged to tax in the previous year in which such interest income is credited to P&L account or in which such interest income fon sticky loans) is received, whichever is earlier

THE ACIT, CIRCLE2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. KALTHIA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2127/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 A.C.I.T., Kalthia Engineering & Construction Ltd., Circle-2(1)(2), Vs. 193, Kalthia House, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad.

193, Kalthia House, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad. PAN: AAACK8944N (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri D.B Gohil, Sr. D.R Assessee by : Shri Manish Shah, A.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 15/12/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/12/2021 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue

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)

Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The assessee claimed deduction on basis of the Notification dated 30.10.2016 which clearly stated that the above mentioned trust is covered under one time registration and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, A.Y. 2017-18,2019-20 & 2019-20 no renewal is necessary. The DRP/AO, while disallowing

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)

Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The assessee claimed deduction on basis of the Notification dated 30.10.2016 which clearly stated that the above mentioned trust is covered under one time registration and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, A.Y. 2017-18,2019-20 & 2019-20 no renewal is necessary. The DRP/AO, while disallowing

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)

Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The assessee claimed deduction on basis of the Notification dated 30.10.2016 which clearly stated that the above mentioned trust is covered under one time registration and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 Joshi Technologies International Inc India Projects, A.Y. 2017-18,2019-20 & 2019-20 no renewal is necessary. The DRP/AO, while disallowing