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 hereby partially allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

u/s, 271(1)(c) of the Act on the contested addition on account of alleged profit attributed to the appellant without appreciating the fact that mere addition to the taxable income cannot automatically lead to levy of penalty without establishing that the Appellant had deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of income. 3.2 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that

M/S. ATUL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

section 112(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 at all. In view of the above, AO was perfectly justified to levy penalty U/s. 271

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: The Itat Ahmedabad Vide Ita No. 3289/Ahd/2002 & 3343/Ahd/2002. Addition On Account Of Profit On Sale Of Depb For The Purpose Of Rs.11,41,480 Deduction U/S.80Ia Deduction U/S.115Jb(2) In Respect Of Book Losses Of Pradeep Drug Rs.3, 39,12,399

112 (Del.) c) Sivananda Steels Ltd. 256 ITR 683 (Mad.) In view of the above facts and legal position, thus I hold that no penalty is imposable in respect of disallowance of deduction u/s. 80IA on profit arising from DEPB. 4.3. Ground No. 4 pertains to disallowance of claim of losses reduced from the book profit computed u/s. 115JB pertaining

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA vs. SHRI PRAVINCHANDRA RANCHHODBHAI PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pravinchandra The Deputy Commissioner Of Ranchhodbhai Patel, Income-Tax, Vs. 52, Sarvodaya Society, Central Circle-2, Nizampura, Vadodara Vadodara Pan : Acppp 2695 F अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Jigar Adhyaru, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15.02.2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

Section 153A of the Act. Accordingly, proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act was initiated and notice u/s 153A was issued on 20.07.2015. In response to which the assessee had filed return of income u/s. 153A on 27.08.2016 declaring total income of Rs.27,80,341/-. Thereafter, the assessment was finalized u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2016 determining

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. NIRMA LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1187 & 896/Ahd/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2000-2001 & 2004-2005 Nirma Limited, A.C.I.T., Nirma House, Vs. Circle-5, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

112/- respectively cannot be regarded as the profit of the business in pursuance to the explanation (baa) provided under section 80HHC of the Act and therefore the same cannot be considered for calculating the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. As per the AO the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act is available on the export profit

NIRMA LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1187 & 896/Ahd/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2000-2001 & 2004-2005 Nirma Limited, A.C.I.T., Nirma House, Vs. Circle-5, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

112/- respectively cannot be regarded as the profit of the business in pursuance to the explanation (baa) provided under section 80HHC of the Act and therefore the same cannot be considered for calculating the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. As per the AO the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act is available on the export profit

DHARAMTAR MOTORS SERVICES PETROLEUM PRODUCT,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1438 & 2534/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S Dharamtar Motor Services Income Tax Officer, Petroleum Product, Vs. Ward 6(1)(4) C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate 903, Ahmedabad. Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aabfd9182F

Penalty; proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for concealment of income by way of furnishing the inaccurate particular of income is initiated separately. This ground of appeal is accordingly dismissed. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The learned AR before us filed

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 45. The assessee vide letter dated 31-03-2020 has raised the additional ground of appeal

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not justified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 45. The assessee vide letter dated 31-03-2020 has raised the additional ground of appeal

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SANJAY KISHANLAL BISHNOI,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 respectively. Shri AYs:2014-15 & 2015-16 Sh. Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi Omprakash and Shri Sanjay have knowingly and intentionally made, signed and fabricated documents as discussed in detail hereinabove, which were presented to the Customs authorities which they knew were false and incorrect in respect of the value of the imported goods. Hence

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SANJAY KISHANLAL BISHNOI,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 respectively. Shri AYs:2014-15 & 2015-16 Sh. Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi Omprakash and Shri Sanjay have knowingly and intentionally made, signed and fabricated documents as discussed in detail hereinabove, which were presented to the Customs authorities which they knew were false and incorrect in respect of the value of the imported goods. Hence

SMT. RAKSHABEN S. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), ( ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

SMT. USHABEN P. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. SONAL D. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. RAKSHABEN S. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. USHABEN P. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. SONAL D. MEHTA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond

SMT. SONAL D. MEHTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CIRCLE-7),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are allowed consequently the Revenue appeals are dismissed

Section 112 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us raising the respective grounds of appeal: ITA N. 1347/Ahd/2015 for A.Y. 2005-06 (Assessee’s appeal ) 1. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming re - opening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act beyond