THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

239 ITR 795, he deleted the disallowance of interest made by the AO in entirety. 64. The ld.DR was unable to controvert any of the factual finding of the ld.CIT(A). 65. In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere in the order of the ld.CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of interest under section

CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

239 ITR 795, he deleted the disallowance of interest made by the AO in entirety. 64. The ld.DR was unable to controvert any of the factual finding of the ld.CIT(A). 65. In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere in the order of the ld.CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of interest under section

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D amounting to Rs.9,83,15,239/-, disallowance of deduction under Section 35(2AB) amounting

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D amounting to Rs.9,83,15,239/-, disallowance of deduction under Section 35(2AB) amounting

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance of the expense is warranted under section 115BJB of the Act. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The 2nd issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in 8. deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 14,06,42,330/- on account of suppression of production/sales after rejecting

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance of the expense is warranted under section 115BJB of the Act. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The 2nd issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in 8. deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 14,06,42,330/- on account of suppression of production/sales after rejecting

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14A does not arise at all as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of group concern of the appellant namely Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Appeal No 239 of 2014. Therefore, the impugned addition of Rs.39,72,461/- even otherwise requires to be deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred

SHRI DINESH MILLS LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE -2(1)(1), BARODA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 14A of the Act. ITA No.781/Ahd/2016 & 3 others Shree Dinesh Mills Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT (cross-appeals) Asst.Years – 2012-13 & 2013-14 " In all above years, interest disallowance as per rule 8D(ii) were deleted by Hon'ble ITAT as appellant has huge interest free funds in form of Share Capital and Reserve & Surplus. " With regard to administrative expenses while

DILIP HIRALAL MEHTA, HUF,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant & Ms.Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1454/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Dilip Hiralal Mehta-Huf Vs. Ito,Ward-5(2)(2) Prop. Of Ispat Incorporate Ahmedabad. B-208, Nirman Complex Opp: Havmor Restaurant Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaehm 4045 F

section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194C of the Act. 12. Heard parties. It appears from the record that the Ld.AO has made disallowance of Rs.8,51,239

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

239 ITR 775 (SC) has held that the section 32 of the LT. Act, 1961, confers a benefit of the assessee. The provision should be so interpreted and the words used therein should be assigned such meaning as would enable the assessee to secure the benefit intended to be given by the Legislature to the assessee. It was further held