THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. 25. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and challenged the validity of the assessment order on various reasoning including on account of notice issued under section 148 r.w.s. 150(2) of the Act which was time barred, assessment was made without issuing valid notice under

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHALIGRAM INFRA PROJECTS LLP , AHMEDABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

disallowance of interest u/s 40A(2)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961\n4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O.\n5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside\nand that

M/S. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. As the facts and issues involved in the two appeals are common, both the matters were heard together and are being disposed of vide this consolidated order for the sake of ITA Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (M/s. Sahajanand Laser Technology Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Ys

M/S. SAHAJANAND LASER TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. As the facts and issues involved in the two appeals are common, both the matters were heard together and are being disposed of vide this consolidated order for the sake of ITA Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (M/s. Sahajanand Laser Technology Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Ys

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law. 36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed

ROTOMAG MOTORS & CONTROLS (P) LTD.,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

Appeal is allowed

section 14A r.w.r. 8D(2)(ii) in the present case. The suo\nmotu disallowance of Rs. 1,60,838/- offered by the assessee in respect of\nadministrative expenditure is reasonable. We accordingly direct deletion of\nthe disallowance of Rs. 11,97,333/- sustained by the CIT(A). These grounds\nof appeal are allowed.\n6.5 Issue No. 5 – Addition

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this\nissue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute\nbook profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law.\n36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed.\n37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal\nof the Department is partly allowed

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT , BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

section 115JB. The order of the CIT(A) on this\nissue is therefore reversed and the Assessing Officer is directed to recompute\nbook profit after allowing indexation in accordance with law.\n36. Accordingly, Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed.\n37. In the combined result, for Assessment Year 2018-19, the appeal\nof the Department is partly allowed

THE SHUKAN LOTUS COOPERATIVE HOUSING SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs.472220/-. 3. The order passed by authorities is required to be quashed as CPC acted beyond the power given u/s. 143(1) of the Act. 4. Charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C unjustified.” The Shukan Lotus Cooperative Housing Service Society Ltd. vs. ITO Asst. Year –2021-22 - 2

CANPAC TRENDS PVT. LTD.,BAVLA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

220\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AABCV 9858 M\nबनाम /\nv/s.\nThe ACIT\nCircle-1(1)(2)\nAhmedabad\n(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nAssessee by :\n-None-\nRevenue by :\nDr. Sanjay Lal, CIT-DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing\nघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement:\n:\n16/01/2025\n20/01/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:\nThis appeal is filed

THE VENUS PARKLAND CO.OPERATGIVE HOUSING SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee as per the provisions of section 57 of the Act, against interest income earned from FD as made in the assessment order was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT (A)-NFAC

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 68 of the. Act were duly submitted during the course of assessment proceedings itself. It therefore appears that the addition has been made purely on the basis of surmises and conjectures because the appellant had already proved the genuineness of the credit entries. No addition can be made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions and that no document

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA. vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 68 of the. Act were duly submitted during the course of assessment proceedings itself. It therefore appears that the addition has been made purely on the basis of surmises and conjectures because the appellant had already proved the genuineness of the credit entries. No addition can be made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions and that no document

BAKERI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Bakeri Projects Pvt. Lt. The Dcit, Cir.(1)(1) 1St Floor, Sanskrut Vs. Ahmedabad. Old High Court Road Off: Ashram Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aagcb 1864 L (Applicant) (Responent)

220) had resulted in under-assessment of income and consequent short levy of tax. It was held that the assessment order was prima facie erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue to the extent of excess allowance of depreciation loss, and the AO had failed to conduct necessary verification. Consequently, the PCIT invoked his jurisdiction under section