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

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

14A?" 2 The learned CIT(Appeals)) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs.8,64,686/- on account of repairing expenses. 3. The learned CIT(Appeals)) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty on the issue of addition of Rs.94,71,966/- in total income as per provisions of Section 115JB

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRECLE-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: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I T Act. 3.0 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the charging of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4.0 The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or modify

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, M/S. Adani Enterprises Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Vs Adani House, Nr. Mithakhali Ahmedabad Six Roads, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380009 Pan : Aabca 2804 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, Ar & Shri Biren Shah, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2022

section 36(2) of the Act have not been complied with and hence the same was disallowed and added back to the total income. Penalty proceedings u/s, 271(1)(c) of the Act were also initiated on this issue. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed Rs. 5,02,181/- out of the total addition made by the A.O. on this issue

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, 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 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 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 hereby partially allowed for statistical purposes

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

u/s 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD, VADODARA

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

u/s 14A?\n\n2 The learned CIT(Appeals)) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs.8,64,686/- on account of repairing expenses.\n\n3. The learned CIT(Appeals)) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty on the issue of addition of Rs.94,71,966/- in total income as per provisions

THE ACIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CHANDRAKANT G PATEL, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be levied. Reliance is placed on decision of Hon:ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT VsBennet Coleman & Co Ltd 215 Taxman 93 wherein it is held as under: "Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For concealment of income [Bona fide claim, disallowance of] - Assessment year

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CIRECLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Us.

penalty proceedings under section 271 (l)(c) of the I T Act. 5.0 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the charging of interest under section 234B, 234C and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4.1. Regarding grounds no. 1.0 to 1.2 namely disallowance u/s. 14A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KGN INDUSTRIES LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal field by the Revenue is allowed

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus determined the assessed income as Rs. 1,68,10,620/- u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and also charged interest of u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) as the assessee company has concealed its income

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

14A on the basis of estimates and it was estimate of department versus estimate by appellant. In the present case, appellant has made a claim which is not permissible as per 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

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Before taking up the above appeals of the Revenue, the ld.counsel for the assessee vehemently contested maintainability of the above three appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in view of recent CBDT circular no.3 of 2018 whereby the Board has instructed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Before taking up the above appeals of the Revenue, the ld.counsel for the assessee vehemently contested maintainability of the above three appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in view of recent CBDT circular no.3 of 2018 whereby the Board has instructed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Before taking up the above appeals of the Revenue, the ld.counsel for the assessee vehemently contested maintainability of the above three appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in view of recent CBDT circular no.3 of 2018 whereby the Board has instructed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA vs. M/S. WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,), BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Before taking up the above appeals of the Revenue, the ld.counsel for the assessee vehemently contested maintainability of the above three appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in view of recent CBDT circular no.3 of 2018 whereby the Board has instructed

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2484 & 2485/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2000-2001 Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Acit, Cir.4 Known As Msk Projects Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutta Road, Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C

penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Before taking up the above appeals of the Revenue, the ld.counsel for the assessee vehemently contested maintainability of the above three appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in view of recent CBDT circular no.3 of 2018 whereby the Board has instructed