Search: penalty u/s 271

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LTD.,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2546/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2365/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

THA ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, BARODA vs. M/S. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 106/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 548/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 135/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

88E for the securities transaction tax paid during the year. The assessee-company has complied with the applicable legal provisions under the Companies Act, particularly, sections 149, 372A, 249, requirements of Schedule VI as well as the provisions of AS-13 on investment. The assessee has maintained only one portfolio. It is further pleaded that during the year there