THE ACIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 1,87,58,401/- , vide assessment order dated 30.12.2011 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A) , which appeal stood

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGG. INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 1,87,58,401/- , vide assessment order dated 30.12.2011 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A) , which appeal stood

THE DY. CIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 1,87,58,401/- , vide assessment order dated 30.12.2011 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A) , which appeal stood

THE DY. CIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 1,87,58,401/- , vide assessment order dated 30.12.2011 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment framed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act, the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A) , which appeal stood

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

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

801A(4) of the I.T Act in respect of the 10( ten) projects as reproduced in para 2.2.4 of this appellate order.” 5. Aggrieved by the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed an appeal before the Tribunal , and the assessee has filed CO, for assessment year 2007-08. The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena

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

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

801A(4) of the I.T Act in respect of the 10( ten) projects as reproduced in para 2.2.4 of this appellate order.” 5. Aggrieved by the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed an appeal before the Tribunal , and the assessee has filed CO, for assessment year 2007-08. The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena

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

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

801A(4) of the I.T Act in respect of the 10( ten) projects as reproduced in para 2.2.4 of this appellate order.” 5. Aggrieved by the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed an appeal before the Tribunal , and the assessee has filed CO, for assessment year 2007-08. The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Chetram Meena

SADBHAV ENGINEERING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed\nand that of the Revenue are dismissed

iv) holding that where\nno incriminating material is found during search on a person, the AO\ncannot take into consideration any other material for making\nassessments.\n42. Undoubtedly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said decision has\nemphasised the absence or presence of any incriminating material\nfound during search for making addition/disallowances in search\nassessments framed u/s 153A

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

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

801A(13) with retrospective effect from 1.4.2000 which reads as under: "Explanation- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to a business referred to in sub-section (4) which is in the nature of a works contract awarded by any person (including the Central or State Government

M/S. DRAIPAL-MSKEL (JV),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-9,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

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

801A(13) with retrospective effect from 1.4.2000 which reads as under: "Explanation- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to a business referred to in sub-section (4) which is in the nature of a works contract awarded by any person (including the Central or State Government

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)

801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 Without calling for data the learned AO erred in holding that there is mechanical apportionment of expenses & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that the actual expenses are charged to each well and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022

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)

801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 Without calling for data the learned AO erred in holding that there is mechanical apportionment of expenses & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that the actual expenses are charged to each well and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022

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)

801A(10) even though the same are not applicable. It is submitted it be so held now. 2.6 Without calling for data the learned AO erred in holding that there is mechanical apportionment of expenses & no actual expenses are accounted on wells. It is submitted that the actual expenses are charged to each well and I.T.A Nos. 80, 81 & 244/Ahd/2022

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

iv) adjustment of\nincome relatable to subsequent year, and (v) disallowance of\ndeduction u/s 80IA for power units. Book profit was recomputed\nat Rs.8,15,36,38,898/-.\n5. Following is the tabulated summary of assessments for both\nthe years:\nSr Particulars\nΑ.Υ. 2015-16\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17\n1\nDate of filing original\nReturn of income

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

iv) adjustment of\nincome relatable to subsequent year, and (v) disallowance of\ndeduction u/s 80IA for power units. Book profit was recomputed\nat Rs.8,15,36,38,898/-.\n5.\nITA Nos.1412-1413/Ahd/2019 with others\nNirma Limited Vs. DCIT\n Assessment Years (2015-16 & 2016-17)\n5\nFollowing is the tabulated summary of assessments for both\nthe years:\nSr\nParticulars

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

iv) adjustment of\nincome relatable to subsequent year, and (v) disallowance of\ndeduction u/s 80IA for power units. Book profit was recomputed\nat Rs.8,15,36,38,898/-.\nITA Nos.1412-1413/Ahd/2019 with others\nNirma Limited Vs. DCIT\n Assessment Years (2015-16 & 2016-17)\n5\n5.\nFollowing is the tabulated summary of assessments for both\nthe years:\nSr\nParticulars

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

4. Explanation 3 states that the expression `asset' shall mean an intangible asset,\nbeing know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any\nother business or commercial rights of similar nature. A reading the words `any\nother business or commercial rights of similar nature' in clause (b) of Explanation\n3 indicates that goodwill would fall under the expression `any other

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 1 1 , VADODARA, VADODARA vs. NETAFIM IRRIGATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

801A of the Act amounting to Rs.28,35,347/ ignoring the fact that assessee was executing contractual functions on behalf of its holding company for the Andhra Pradesh Government, which itself treated the payments as contractual in nature. (iv) The appellant craves leaves to add, modify, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of, or before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 1 1 , VADODARA, VADODARA vs. NETAFIM IRRIGATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

801A of the Act amounting to Rs.28,35,347/ ignoring the fact that assessee was executing contractual functions on behalf of its holding company for the Andhra Pradesh Government, which itself treated the payments as contractual in nature. (iv) The appellant craves leaves to add, modify, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of, or before