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

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

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-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

73 taxmann.com 98] has held as under: "Section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Profits and gains from infrastructure undertakings (Telecommunication services) - Assessment years 2004-05 to 2008-09 - Appellant was engaged in business of providing telecommunication services - It claimed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of profits and gains derived from following six items: extraordinary

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT POWER LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

73 taxmann.com 98] has held as under: "Section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Profits and gains from infrastructure undertakings (Telecommunication services) - Assessment years 2004-05 to 2008-09 - Appellant was engaged in business of providing telecommunication services - It claimed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of profits and gains derived from following six items: extraordinary

ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

73 TTJ 404 (Ahd), the AO reduced the claim for depreciation on the basis of his own findings in the AY 2001-02. 3. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, following his own decision for the AY 2003-04. 4. The assessee is now in appeal before us against the aforesaid findings of the learned

GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Abs Tower, Old Circle 1(1)(1), Padra Road, Baroda-390007 Baroda Pan : Aaacg 6725 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Samir Tekriwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.12.2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta:

73,433/- to income disallowed by the assessee (ii)Total disallowance made by the assessee - (-) Rs. 75,00,000/- of other expenses on estimation basis Net disallowance made by the Assessing Officer - Rs.7,92,83,524/- 6. The Assessing Officer further went on to make addition to the book profits of the assessee under Section

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

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

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

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

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

73,278/-. 8. The total disallowance thus worked out to Rs.9,33,104/-, which was added to the total income. The AO further made a similar adjustment to the book profits computed under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

73. The issue raised by the assessee in cross objection is that the learned CIT- A erred in confirming the part addition of Rs. 7,89,540/- made on account of disallowances of claim under section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

73. The issue raised by the assessee in cross objection is that the learned CIT- A erred in confirming the part addition of Rs. 7,89,540/- made on account of disallowances of claim under section

THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

73. The issue raised by the assessee in cross objection is that the learned CIT- A erred in confirming the part addition of Rs. 7,89,540/- made on account of disallowances of claim under section

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

73. The issue raised by the assessee in cross objection is that the learned CIT- A erred in confirming the part addition of Rs. 7,89,540/- made on account of disallowances of claim under section

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