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

801A of the Income Tax Act, 1961." 9. "that the Id. CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in allowing deduction it/s. 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 196] on account of Sale of scraps amounting to Rs. 10,45,41,099/-. " 10 ''that the Id. CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in allowing deduction ii/s

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

801A of the Income Tax Act, 1961." 9. "that the Id. CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in allowing deduction it/s. 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 196] on account of Sale of scraps amounting to Rs. 10,45,41,099/-. " 10 ''that the Id. CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in allowing deduction ii/s

M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

801A Rs.214,95,00,000/-. 6. Additional Ground on account of corporate guarantee commission of Rs.166,56,019/given to Bank for financial assistance to wholly owned subsidiary. Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 4 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer

NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

801A Rs.214,95,00,000/-. 6. Additional Ground on account of corporate guarantee commission of Rs.166,56,019/given to Bank for financial assistance to wholly owned subsidiary. Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 4 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer

THE DCIT, CIR-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

801A Rs.214,95,00,000/-. 6. Additional Ground on account of corporate guarantee commission of Rs.166,56,019/given to Bank for financial assistance to wholly owned subsidiary. Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 4 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer

JT. CTI (OSD), CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

801A Rs.214,95,00,000/-. 6. Additional Ground on account of corporate guarantee commission of Rs.166,56,019/given to Bank for financial assistance to wholly owned subsidiary. Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT (Five Appeals) 4 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE(INT.TAXN.)-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

section 801A(8) and 801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 The learned AO, without requiring appellant to furnish any details in assessment proceedings, erred in observing that apportionment of expenses has been done on mechanical basis & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXA-1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

section 801A(8) and 801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 The learned AO, without requiring appellant to furnish any details in assessment proceedings, erred in observing that apportionment of expenses has been done on mechanical basis & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that

JOSHI TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL INC INDIA PROJECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT (INT. TAXA-1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

section 801A(8) and 801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 The learned AO, without requiring appellant to furnish any details in assessment proceedings, erred in observing that apportionment of expenses has been done on mechanical basis & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that

M/S. ZAVERI & CO. PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

ii) Since the assessee is not eligible for any claim of deduction u/s.10AA of the Act, it is not eligible for any reduction in book profit on account of profit of SEZ unit. (iii) The interest income on bank FDR of Rs.219,11,58,218/- is in the nature of 'income from other sources' and therefore, the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZAVERI & COMPANY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

ii) Since the assessee is not eligible for any claim of deduction u/s.10AA of the Act, it is not eligible for any reduction in book profit on account of profit of SEZ unit. (iii) The interest income on bank FDR of Rs.219,11,58,218/- is in the nature of 'income from other sources' and therefore, the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ZAVERI & COMPANY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

ii) Since the assessee is not eligible for any claim of deduction u/s.10AA of the Act, it is not eligible for any reduction in book profit on account of profit of SEZ unit. (iii) The interest income on bank FDR of Rs.219,11,58,218/- is in the nature of 'income from other sources' and therefore, the assessee

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

disallowance of overheads expenses of Rs. 26,719/-. 2. Alternatively, Objection No.1, the learned Commissioner of Appeals-VIII, Ahmedabad erred in not adding back overhead expenses of Rs. 26,719/- while computing the deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

disallowance of overheads expenses of Rs. 26,719/-. 2. Alternatively, Objection No.1, the learned Commissioner of Appeals-VIII, Ahmedabad erred in not adding back overhead expenses of Rs. 26,719/- while computing the deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

disallowance of overheads expenses of Rs. 26,719/-. 2. Alternatively, Objection No.1, the learned Commissioner of Appeals-VIII, Ahmedabad erred in not adding back overhead expenses of Rs. 26,719/- while computing the deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business

NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCTI , CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

801A.\nAccordingly, the claim was disallowed.\n35. The CIT(A), however, after considering the detailed\nsubmissions of the assessee and relying upon binding judicial\nprecedents, allowed the claim. The CIT(A) noted that an identical\nissue had been decided in favour of the assessee for earlier\n assessment years by the co-ordinate Bench and also by the\nHon

M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue and the appeals for AYs 2012-\n13 & 2013-14 filed by the assessee are partly allowed, while the appeal of the assessee\nfor AY 2014-15 is allowed

3(b) of Section 32(1): 'Goodwill of a Business or Profession' has\nbeen specifically excluded from the definition of intangible assets.\nSection 43(6)(c)(ii): Definition of WDV of the block of assets has been amended\nto provide that written down value of Goodwill is required to be reduced from\nthe Opening WDV in such cases, where

THE DCIT,(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. MIDVALLEY HEALTHCARE SERVICES PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

ii) Operating Profits Rs.822571 Lacs (iii) Percentage of operating margin on cost : 39.07% ITA No.204/Ahd/2013 with C.O.No.45/Ahd/2015 and 7 others A.Y. 2008-09 7 8. In view of the above and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee’s reasonable profit in the eligible transaction is restricted to 25% and the balance of 962.33% is considered

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1285 & 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & Ita No.1396 & 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1327 & 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1414 & 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Ahmedabad. Torrent House Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench

801A (5) and sub section (7) to (12) shall apply to section 80IC (is well Section 80IA(5) is reproduced for ready reference. "(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, the profits and gains of an eligible business to which the provisions of sub-section (1) apply shall, for the purposes of determining the quantum