THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance made of deduction claimed under section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 27. The solitary dispute for consideration, it was pointed out, related to the manner of computation of provision for bad and doubtful debts. The ld.counsel for the assessee pointed that as per the provisions of section 36(1)(viia) of the Act, a Scheduled Bank or Cooperative

M/S. HAVMOR ICE CREAM LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Havmor Ice Cream Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, Commerce House Iv Vs Income-Tax, Besides Shell Petrol Pump Circle-2(1)(1), Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Pan : Aabch 6766 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pramod M. Jagtap, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Ahmedabad [Cit(A)] Dated 12.10.2017 & The Solitary Issue Relating To Disallowance Of Rs.15,52,172/- On Account Of Interest As Made By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Ld.Cit(A) Is Raised Therein By Way Of The Following Original Grounds:- “Ground No.1 – Disallowance Of Rs.15,52,172/- Under Section 36(1)(Iii) Towards Capital Work In Progress (“Cwip”) 1. Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.15,52,172/- Under Section 36(1)(Iii) Of The Act On Account Of Expenditure Incurred By The Appellant On Cwip. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Considering The Facts That Expenditure Incurred On Cwip Ay 2013-14 Havmor Ice Cream Ltd. Vs. Dcit 2

disallowance of interest expenditure came to be decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nirma Limited (supra) was entirely different and eventhough it was found as a fact in that case that it was a case of extension of existing business, the interest expenditure was allowed as deduction since the proviso to section 36(1

THE ASST. CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

1,89,45,957/- 28. Before us, at the outset, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that since for the impugned year under consideration since no exempt income was earned by the assessee, there is no question of making any disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. The Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on several judicial precedents in respect

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

1,89,45,957/- 28. Before us, at the outset, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that since for the impugned year under consideration since no exempt income was earned by the assessee, there is no question of making any disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. The Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on several judicial precedents in respect

M/S.HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1 , AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 36(1) of the Act, the assessee being a non-banking financial company, an amount not exceeding 5% of the total income computed before making any deduction under this clause and Chapter VI-A of the Act. Thus, it would be evident that the amounts claimed as deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) in the Return of Income

MAHENDRA PATEL BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarit(Ss)A No.61 To 65/Ahd/2025 Asstt.Year : 2015-16 To 2019-20 And

via email from the designated ITBA portal and also uploaded on the assessee's e-filing account. Referring to section 282A(2) and Rule 127A(1), the Ld. CIT(A) held that absence of a digital signature is a curable defect protected under section 292B of the Act and cannot render the assessment order invalid. 2.6 On the merits

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

36,39,473/-, which were made in earlier years\ndue to non-receipt of advices, intimations, invoices and the like, but were\nactually received in the current year. The assessee submitted that these past\nprovisions represented bona fide liabilities and had been disclosed for\nITA No. 954/Ahd/2016, 1315/Ahd/2016,\n1807/Ahd/2017 & 2033/Ahd/2017\nAmbalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. vs. DCIT\n& DCIT/ACIT vs. Ambalal

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1)(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

36,39,473/-. which were made in earlier years\ndue to non-receipt of advices, intimations, invoices and the like, but were\nactually received in the current year. The assessee submitted that these past\nprovisions represented bona fide liabilities and had been disclosed for\nITA No. 954/Ahd/2016, 1315/Ahd/2016,\n1807/Ahd/2017 & 2033/Ahd/2017\nAmbalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. vs. DCIT\n& DCIT/ACIT vs. Ambalal

DHOLU CONSTRUCTION & PROJECTS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

section 36(1 )(va), ITA No s. 3144 to 3146/Ahd/16 & Others 9 . A.Ys. 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 & Others disallowance made by Assessing Officer was just and proper - Held, yes [Para 8] [In favour of revenue] 15. In view of the above said Jurisdictional High Court, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 16. Now we come to ground relating

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

via) of clause (23C) of section 10, shall not be treated as application of income for charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.]” “61[62(5) The forms and modes of investing or depositing the money referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) shall be the following, namely :— (i) investment in savings certificates

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

via) of clause (23C) of section 10, shall not be treated as application of income for charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.]” “61[62(5) The forms and modes of investing or depositing the money referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) shall be the following, namely :— (i) investment in savings certificates

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

via) of clause (23C) of section 10, shall not be treated as application of income for charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.]” “61[62(5) The forms and modes of investing or depositing the money referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) shall be the following, namely :— (i) investment in savings certificates

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

via) of clause (23C) of section 10, shall not be treated as application of income for charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter.]” “61[62(5) The forms and modes of investing or depositing the money referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) shall be the following, namely :— (i) investment in savings certificates

NUTAN NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

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

disallowance of ₹35.98 crores was required is completely absurd and\ncontrary to law. He relied on the decisions in Atul Ltd. (162 taxmann.com\n862), Reliance Power Ltd. (159 taxmann.com 1626) and Cricket Club of\nIndia Ltd. (165 taxmann.com 376), which hold that only income-yielding\ninvestments can be considered for Rule 8D(2)(iii) purposes. Finally, the\ncounsel submitted that

DAWOODI BOHRA MUSAFIRKHANA TRUST,KHAMBHAT vs. THE ITO, WARD (EXEMPTION), VADODARA

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

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana Income-Tax Officer, Trust, Ward (Exemption), 1, Dawoodi Bohra Musafirkhana, Vadodara Opp. Bus Stand, Khambhat, Gujarat-388620 Pan : Aaatd 2007 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Ankit Chokshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

disallowance made by the Ld. AO of capital expenditure of Rs.99,12,380/-. Therefore your appellant prays your honour to allow the capital expenditure of Rs.99,12,380/- as application of income.” 3. At the outset, it was stated that there was a solitary issue in the present appeal, being the allowance of claim of exemption to corpus donation

M/S. BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals being IT(SS)A No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

via order dated 08.11.2011. The proceeding before ITAT for AY 2008-09 completed on 16.10.2019. On 09.02.2012 search and seizure operation was carried out on the premises of assessee. Thereafter the notice u/s 153A was issued on 09.10.2012. In response to the same, the assessee filed return of income as filed u/s 139(1) dated 16.01.2013. During the course

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. RITABEN SAKETKUMAR TANNA, AHMEDABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA

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

36(1)(iii) 11,114 4 Disallowance of business expenses claimed in P&L A/c Municipal Tax -- -- Bad Debt 3,32,019 4,10,591 Salary @ 10% 58,841 1,39,768 Transport, Khedut lodging etc. @ 20% 1,71,844 2,53,464 39,952 Kasar(Discount) @ 50% 2,63,606 5,58,508 1,27,823 1

SAKETKUMAR RUGNATH TANNA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. INDUMATIBEN RUGNATH TANNA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA

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

36(1)(iii) 11,114 4 Disallowance of business expenses claimed in P&L A/c Municipal Tax -- -- Bad Debt 3,32,019 4,10,591 Salary @ 10% 58,841 1,39,768 Transport, Khedut lodging etc. @ 20% 1,71,844 2,53,464 39,952 Kasar(Discount) @ 50% 2,63,606 5,58,508 1,27,823 1