JT.CIT(E),CIRCLE -2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

10B electronically, before the due date of filing the Return of Income as per Rule 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules. I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page No 4 Vadodara Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT (E) Further, it was not clear whether the assessee has invested its accumulated fund

JT.CIT(E), CIRCLE-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

10B electronically, before the due date of filing the Return of Income as per Rule 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules. I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page No 4 Vadodara Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT (E) Further, it was not clear whether the assessee has invested its accumulated fund

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

10B electronically, before the due date of filing the Return of Income as per Rule 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules. I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page No 4 Vadodara Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT (E) Further, it was not clear whether the assessee has invested its accumulated fund

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

10B electronically, before the due date of filing the Return of Income as per Rule 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules. I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page No 4 Vadodara Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT (E) Further, it was not clear whether the assessee has invested its accumulated fund

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

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

10B electronically, before the due date of filing the Return of Income as per Rule 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules. I.T.A Nos. 342/Ahd/2023 & 5 Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 Page No 4 Vadodara Urban Development Authority vs. ACIT (E) Further, it was not clear whether the assessee has invested its accumulated fund

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent (S) Appellant Respondent 1-2 438-439/Ahd/2018 2008-09 Ascent Finechem Pvt. A.C.I.T, Circle- & Ltd., 1(1)(2), 2009-10 11, Ground Floor, Ahmedabad. Suryarath, B/H. Whilte House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan No.Aabca6349Q

House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. PAN No.AABCA6349Q 3. 1291/Ahd/2015 2010-11 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1, Ahmedabad. 4. 3525/Ahd/2015 2011-12 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad. 5. 3542/Ahd/2016 2013-14 -do- -do- 6. 151/Ahd/2016 2012-13 -do- -do- 7. 440/Ahd/2018 2014-15 -do- -do- Assessee by : Shri P.F. Jain, A.R Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent (S) Appellant Respondent 1-2 438-439/Ahd/2018 2008-09 Ascent Finechem Pvt. A.C.I.T, Circle- & Ltd., 1(1)(2), 2009-10 11, Ground Floor, Ahmedabad. Suryarath, B/H. Whilte House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan No.Aabca6349Q

House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. PAN No.AABCA6349Q 3. 1291/Ahd/2015 2010-11 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1, Ahmedabad. 4. 3525/Ahd/2015 2011-12 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad. 5. 3542/Ahd/2016 2013-14 -do- -do- 6. 151/Ahd/2016 2012-13 -do- -do- 7. 440/Ahd/2018 2014-15 -do- -do- Assessee by : Shri P.F. Jain, A.R Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent (S) Appellant Respondent 1-2 438-439/Ahd/2018 2008-09 Ascent Finechem Pvt. A.C.I.T, Circle- & Ltd., 1(1)(2), 2009-10 11, Ground Floor, Ahmedabad. Suryarath, B/H. Whilte House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan No.Aabca6349Q

House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. PAN No.AABCA6349Q 3. 1291/Ahd/2015 2010-11 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1, Ahmedabad. 4. 3525/Ahd/2015 2011-12 -do- D.C.I.T. Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad. 5. 3542/Ahd/2016 2013-14 -do- -do- 6. 151/Ahd/2016 2012-13 -do- -do- 7. 440/Ahd/2018 2014-15 -do- -do- Assessee by : Shri P.F. Jain, A.R Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PRIYAL INTERNATIONAL P.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No. 4 of the Revenues appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3115/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

House Ahmedabad Mithakhali Six Roads Navrangpura, Ahmedabad- 380009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECP4640A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Lalit P. Jain, Sr. DR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent Mehul K Patel, AR by : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of 17/12/2018 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of 15/02/2019 Pronouncement आदेश

ASSOCIATION OF INDIA PANELBOARD MANUFACTURER,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CPC , BENGLURU

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

House, 2nd Floor, Near Processing Centre, Neelkanth Green Bengaluru-560500 Bunglows, Off Sindhu (Respondent) Bhavan Road, Ahmedabad-380058 PAN No:AANCA4932F (Appellant) Appellant by :Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Sudhiksha Rani, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 08-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 22-07-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

house research and development was eligible for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). 7. Re: Disallowance on account of R&D expenses incurred by the Appellant alleged to have been incurred for products manufactured by partnership firms Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (SPI) and Sun Pharma Sikkim (SPS) debited in the books of the Appellant: 7.1 On the facts

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

house research and development was eligible for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). 7. Re: Disallowance on account of R&D expenses incurred by the Appellant alleged to have been incurred for products manufactured by partnership firms Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (SPI) and Sun Pharma Sikkim (SPS) debited in the books of the Appellant: 7.1 On the facts

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

house research and development was eligible for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). 7. Re: Disallowance on account of R&D expenses incurred by the Appellant alleged to have been incurred for products manufactured by partnership firms Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (SPI) and Sun Pharma Sikkim (SPS) debited in the books of the Appellant: 7.1 On the facts

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

house research and development was eligible for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). 7. Re: Disallowance on account of R&D expenses incurred by the Appellant alleged to have been incurred for products manufactured by partnership firms Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (SPI) and Sun Pharma Sikkim (SPS) debited in the books of the Appellant: 7.1 On the facts

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

House Pvt. Limited. Vs CIT 157 ITR 86 (SC) and further failed to take note of the fact that, in allowing the expenditure in earlier years, undue reliance was placed on the formal recitals in the agreements with the associate concerns presenting the lump sum payment for acquisition of technical knowhow as periodical payment

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,, VADODARA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

House Pvt. Limited. Vs CIT 157 ITR 86 (SC) and further failed to take note of the fact that, in allowing the expenditure in earlier years, undue reliance was placed on the formal recitals in the agreements with the associate concerns presenting the lump sum payment for acquisition of technical knowhow as periodical payment

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NABROS PHARMA LTD., AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

House Pvt. Limited. Vs CIT 157 ITR 86 (SC) and further failed to take note of the fact that, in allowing the expenditure in earlier years, undue reliance was placed on the formal recitals in the agreements with the associate concerns presenting the lump sum payment for acquisition of technical knowhow as periodical payment

M/S. FAG BEARINGS INDIA LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(2),(TPO), BARODA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

House Pvt. Limited. Vs CIT 157 ITR 86 (SC) and further failed to take note of the fact that, in allowing the expenditure in earlier years, undue reliance was placed on the formal recitals in the agreements with the associate concerns presenting the lump sum payment for acquisition of technical knowhow as periodical payment