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

disallowance and would not reflect the correct profit derived from the respective eligible undertakings. The CIT(A) further took note of the fact that the methodology adopted by the assessee was consistent and in accordance with accepted accounting practices, and that in earlier years, the same treatment had been accepted by the Department without dispute. 73. We find merit

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance in assessment year 2002-2003 in the light of Section 14A of the Act. 73. For the reasons which

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance in assessment year 2002-2003 in the light of Section 14A of the Act. 73. For the reasons which

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

73,61,055/- included expenses incurred on R&D which were not approved by the DSIR, prescribed authority under the Act for furnishing requisite certificate specified under the Section, to the tune of Rs.6,49,23,731/-. In the computation of income, therefore, while assessee claimed weighted deduction of the entire revenue expenditure of Rs.16.73 crores amounting to Rs.25.09 crores

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

73,61,055/- included expenses incurred on R&D which were not approved by the DSIR, prescribed authority under the Act for furnishing requisite certificate specified under the Section, to the tune of Rs.6,49,23,731/-. In the computation of income, therefore, while assessee claimed weighted deduction of the entire revenue expenditure of Rs.16.73 crores amounting to Rs.25.09 crores

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

73,61,055/- included expenses incurred on R&D which were not approved by the DSIR, prescribed authority under the Act for furnishing requisite certificate specified under the Section, to the tune of Rs.6,49,23,731/-. In the computation of income, therefore, while assessee claimed weighted deduction of the entire revenue expenditure of Rs.16.73 crores amounting to Rs.25.09 crores

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

73,61,055/- included expenses incurred on R&D which were not approved by the DSIR, prescribed authority under the Act for furnishing requisite certificate specified under the Section, to the tune of Rs.6,49,23,731/-. In the computation of income, therefore, while assessee claimed weighted deduction of the entire revenue expenditure of Rs.16.73 crores amounting to Rs.25.09 crores

VARUN SATYAPAL SINGHAL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(3( NOW THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Us, At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That He Shall Not Be Pressing For Ground Nos. 3, 4 & 5 Of His

73,930/- and Rs. 7,39,790/-; respectively as against that paid in other cases @ 18%. The Assessing Officer accordingly invoked section 40A(2) (b) of the act to benchmark assessee's interest payment @ 18% and computed the corresponding interest disallowance

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

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

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

disallowance under Section 43(5) read with Section 73 for Rs 13,18,08,810/- which is not based upon

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

73 of\nthe Act, as per which the said claims were apparently not allowable\nas per the Ld.PCIT. The Ld.PCIT after finding so has restored the issue\nback to the AO for examination afresh in accordance with law.\nWhat has to be therefore considered by us is whether prima facie\nbasis the facts relating to the issue on record

THE VARDHMAN STAMPINGS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

73 of\nthe Act, as per which the said claims were apparently not allowable\nas per the Ld.PCIT. The Ld.PCIT after finding so has restored the issue\nback to the AO for examination afresh in accordance with law.\nWhat has to be therefore considered by us is whether prima facie\nbasis the facts relating to the issue on record

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), AHMEDABAD vs. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst. Commissioner Of M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax, Corporate House, S.G. Highway, Central Circle 2(3), Nr. Sola Bridge, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380 054 [Pan : Aaaci 5120 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit (Dr) Respondent Represented By: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble:-

disallowance and would not reflect the correct profit derived from the respective eligible undertakings. The CIT(A) further took note of the fact that the methodology adopted by the assessee was consistent and in accordance with accepted accounting practices, and that in earlier years, the same treatment had been accepted by the Department without dispute. 73. We find merit

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

73,69,023/- Date of 29-02-2016 31-07-2017 31-07-2017 24-09-219 Order of CIT(A) Nature of Disallowance / Addition in Rs. Disallowance 5,68,50,000/- 4,26,37,500/- 3,19,78,125/- 1,79,87,695/- of Depreciation on Intangible Assets Decision of Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

73,69,023/- Date of 29-02-2016 31-07-2017 31-07-2017 24-09-219 Order of CIT(A) Nature of Disallowance / Addition in Rs. Disallowance 5,68,50,000/- 4,26,37,500/- 3,19,78,125/- 1,79,87,695/- of Depreciation on Intangible Assets Decision of Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

73,69,023/- Date of 29-02-2016 31-07-2017 31-07-2017 24-09-219 Order of CIT(A) Nature of Disallowance / Addition in Rs. Disallowance 5,68,50,000/- 4,26,37,500/- 3,19,78,125/- 1,79,87,695/- of Depreciation on Intangible Assets Decision of Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

73,69,023/- Date of 29-02-2016 31-07-2017 31-07-2017 24-09-219 Order of CIT(A) Nature of Disallowance / Addition in Rs. Disallowance 5,68,50,000/- 4,26,37,500/- 3,19,78,125/- 1,79,87,695/- of Depreciation on Intangible Assets Decision of Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

73,69,023/- Date of 29-02-2016 31-07-2017 31-07-2017 24-09-219 Order of CIT(A) Nature of Disallowance / Addition in Rs. Disallowance 5,68,50,000/- 4,26,37,500/- 3,19,78,125/- 1,79,87,695/- of Depreciation on Intangible Assets Decision of Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed

PAWAN EDIFICE PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Appeals are partly allowed for\nstatistical reasons

73,278/-.\n8.\nThe total disallowance thus worked out to Rs.9,33,104/-, which was\nadded to the total income. The AO further made a similar adjustment to the\nbook profits computed under section