THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

business of builders and property developers, and bringing the same to lax in the hands of the assessee under ihe head ,,Income from house property". We thus in terms of our aforesaid observations set aside the order of the CIT(A). 11. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7.2. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VENUS INFRASTRUCTURE & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

business of builders and property developers, and bringing the same to lax in the hands of the assessee under ihe head ,,Income from house property". We thus in terms of our aforesaid observations set aside the order of the CIT(A). 11. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7.2. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar\Nand\Nshri Makarand V. Mahadeokar\Nआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1654/Ahd/2024 & 1656/Ahd/2024\Nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2016-17 Respectively\Ndeputy Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax\Ncircle-1(1)(1)\Nvadodara 390 007\Nबनाम /\Nv/S.\Ngujrat State Electricity\Ncorporation Limited\Nsardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan\Nrace Course Circle\Nalkapuri, Baroda – 390 007\N(Gujarat)\Nस्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacg 6864 F\N(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\N(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\Nassessee By:\Nshri Manish J. Shah &\Nshri Jimi Patel, Ars\Nrevenue By :\Nshri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr\Nसुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing\N:\N16/01/2025\Nघोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:\N20/01/2025\Nआदेश/Order\Nper Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:\Nboth The Appeals By The Revenue For Assessment Years (Ays) 2012-13\Nand 2016-17 Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income\Ntax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre-Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter\Nreferred To As “Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act,\N1961[Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”]. The Cit(A) Orders Arose From The\Nassessment Orders Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, By The Deputy\Ncommissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred\Nto As “Ao"], Dated 25.02.2015 (Ay 2012-13) & 28.12.2018 (Ay 2016-17).\N2.\Nthe Primary Issue In Both The Appeals Concerns The Treatment Of Interest\Nincome On Loans & Advances Provided To Employees, Amounting To\Nrs.4,56,05,000/- (Ay 2012-13) & Rs.8,00,35,000/- (Ay 2016-17).\N2.

business\nof lending and the loans served only personal benefits for employees.\nSimilarly, in the assessment order dated 28.12.2018, the AO classified\nRs.8,00,35,000/- under \"income from other sources\" with the same rationale.\n3. 1. The issue travelled before the Tribunal in the first round of appeal and\nthe Co-ordinate Bench remanded the matter

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

business of the assessee. Thereafter, the AO is also required to give a clear finding about the borrowings made by the assessee on which the said interest was paid. The next step is that the AO has to examine the sources of the funds which were invested for earning the dividend income. If the source of such investment

SHRI ANILBHAI HIRALAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

reassess the total income, where search is conducted u/s 132 which is further evidenced by amendment bythe Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 that inserted 4th proviso to section 153A read with explanation 1, the expression "relevant assessment year" that means an assessment year which falls beyond six assessment years but not later than ten assessment years from

BHANUPRASAD MAGANLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

business income by the Lower Authorities. It is further evident in other co-owner cases, similar reopening of assessments were done and one of the co- owner as against the reassessment

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED, 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: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

business of the assessee. Thereafter, the AO is also required to give a clear finding about the borrowings made by the assessee on which the said interest was paid. The next step ITA Nos.139&178/Ahd/2023 Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT Asst.Year– 2018-19 is that the AO has to examine the sources of the funds which were invested

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-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: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

business of the assessee. Thereafter, the AO is also required to give a clear finding about the borrowings made by the assessee on which the said interest was paid. The next step ITA Nos.139&178/Ahd/2023 Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT Asst.Year– 2018-19 is that the AO has to examine the sources of the funds which were invested

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PARIKH ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

business income. The AO also admitted this fact in the giving effect order of the higher authority. Therefore, the assessee claimed that it is eligible for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. 3.1 The learned CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee allowed the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act in respect of interest income

GANESH HOUSING CORPORATION LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-4, NOW, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd. Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) “Ganesh Corporate House” Navjivan Trust Bldg. Vs. Ahmedabad. 100 Ft. Hebatpur-Thaltej Road Nr. Sola Bridge Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaacg 5590 Q With Co No.216/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd. Navjivan Trust Bldg. “Ganesh Corporate House” Vs. Ahmedabad. 100 Ft. Hebatpur-Thaltej Road Nr. Sola Bridge Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad 380 015. (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Dhiren Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri C. Danday, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/10/2018 आदेश/O R D E R

business income; (b) to disallow contribution to approved gratuity fund of Rs.41,09,796/-, and (c) payment to director who is covered under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act for cancellation of booking of land purchased amounting to Rs.1,08,14,730/- ought to be disallowed. 13. As far as first issue is concerned, we have noticed the finding

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. GANESH HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd. Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) “Ganesh Corporate House” Navjivan Trust Bldg. Vs. Ahmedabad. 100 Ft. Hebatpur-Thaltej Road Nr. Sola Bridge Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaacg 5590 Q With Co No.216/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd. Navjivan Trust Bldg. “Ganesh Corporate House” Vs. Ahmedabad. 100 Ft. Hebatpur-Thaltej Road Nr. Sola Bridge Off. S.G. Highway Ahmedabad 380 015. (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Dhiren Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri C. Danday, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/10/2018 आदेश/O R D E R

business income; (b) to disallow contribution to approved gratuity fund of Rs.41,09,796/-, and (c) payment to director who is covered under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act for cancellation of booking of land purchased amounting to Rs.1,08,14,730/- ought to be disallowed. 13. As far as first issue is concerned, we have noticed the finding

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

business) for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA number 554/AHD/2006 dated 15 February 2008. The relevant part of the decision is quoted below- "We find no fault with the TNMM method adopted by the assessee on the above facts of the case. Even the honourable apex court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co has clearly upheld the adoption

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

business) for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA number 554/AHD/2006 dated 15 February 2008. The relevant part of the decision is quoted below- "We find no fault with the TNMM method adopted by the assessee on the above facts of the case. Even the honourable apex court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co has clearly upheld the adoption

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

business) for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA number 554/AHD/2006 dated 15 February 2008. The relevant part of the decision is quoted below- "We find no fault with the TNMM method adopted by the assessee on the above facts of the case. Even the honourable apex court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co has clearly upheld the adoption

THE ACIT,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

business) for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA number 554/AHD/2006 dated 15 February 2008. The relevant part of the decision is quoted below- "We find no fault with the TNMM method adopted by the assessee on the above facts of the case. Even the honourable apex court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co has clearly upheld the adoption

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD),RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

business) for assessment year 2002-03 in ITA number 554/AHD/2006 dated 15 February 2008. The relevant part of the decision is quoted below- "We find no fault with the TNMM method adopted by the assessee on the above facts of the case. Even the honourable apex court in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co has clearly upheld the adoption

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

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

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

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

ROBIN RAMAVTAR GOENKA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

business in the place of 14 % as determined by the Ld CIT[A]. Further substantial real income has also been taxed in the hands of other entities namely Sankalp Ventures LLP, Sankalp Organisers Pvt. Ltd. and Ginger Properties Pvt. Ltd. in respect of the Asst. Years 2013-14 to 2019-20. Thus Ld. CIT(A) was correct in allowing telescoping