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

3 Disallowance due to Allocation of Common 10,19,24,003 Expenses (Inter-unit allocation) 4 Disallowance under Section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D 8,70,747 5 Disallowance of Weighted Deduction under 65,09,81,251 Section 35(2AB) 6 Capitalization of Interest to Capital Work-in- 11,29,21,996 Progress (CWIP) under Section 36(1

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

3. The first issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT-A erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,70,63,667/- on account of disallowance of business promotion expenses under section 37(1

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

3. The first issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT-A erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,70,63,667/- on account of disallowance of business promotion expenses under section 37(1

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

Section 144C of the Act was passed in this case by the ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2) on 12.12.2019. The Ld. AO proposed the following addition: ITA No. 162/Ahd/2021 (Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT) A.Y.– 2016-17 - 5 – A. Income from House Property [as per Return of Income] Rs. 10,34,525/- B. Business Income [as per Return of income

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

3(b): Disallowance of deduction under section 35(2AB) and alternate claim under section 35(1)(iv) 26. During the assessment

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 363/Ahd/2014 : AY: 2007-08 – Assessee’s appeal 2. In this appeal filed by the assessee, grievances raised are as follows:- ITA Nos. 2371& 2394/Ahd/2013, ITA Nos. 363, 364, 467 & 468/Ahd/2014 Assessee : Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 Page 3 of 37 1

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INDO COLCHEM LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 28.02.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1)(1), Ahmedabad for the Assessment Year 2012-13 with the following grounds: “1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance

JAI PRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT CPC, BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

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

3 Jai Prakash Choudhary vs. ADIT,CPC funds on or before the "due date" mentioned in explanation to section 36(1)(va). Consequently, it is held that the learned tribunal has erred in deleting respective disallowances

JAI PRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT CPC, BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

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

3 Jai Prakash Choudhary vs. ADIT,CPC funds on or before the "due date" mentioned in explanation to section 36(1)(va). Consequently, it is held that the learned tribunal has erred in deleting respective disallowances

JAIPRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

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

3 Jai Prakash Choudhary vs. ADIT,CPC funds on or before the "due date" mentioned in explanation to section 36(1)(va). Consequently, it is held that the learned tribunal has erred in deleting respective disallowances

AARK INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in issuing a notice

KARNAVATI ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In the first ground of appeal, the assessee has raised the following grievance: “1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition on account of commission of Rs.12,09,143/- ignoring fact that liability for commission crystallise during the year

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. INDO COLCHEM PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

1. By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the learned CIT(A)’s order dated 15th May 2017, in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The Assessing Officer has raised following grievance:- “The Ld. CIT(A) has erred