SEQUEL LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is allowable to be deducted / exempted from the total taxable income of the Appellant and therefore, the Impugned Order dated 27th March 2024 passed by the Respondent is bad in law. 4. The Impugned Order dated 27 March 2024 passed by the Respondent is erroneous in noting that the Assessing Order

SHAH RAKESH BHIKHABHAI (HUF),AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

reassess the assessee again and again upon the same issue in a time barred assessment which is already concluded by the assessing officer after applying his mind and conducting sufficient 150 enquiry. 2.6 Lastly, without prejudice to the above, and in the alternative, the assessee would like to submit that your honour has explained that Only three parties' information

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

section 192 of the Act. But the assessee has claimed such expenses without deducting the TDS. Thus the impugned expenses cannot be allowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on records

M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

section 192 of the Act. But the assessee has claimed such expenses without deducting the TDS. Thus the impugned expenses cannot be allowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on records

THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

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

reassessment order was passed on 23.01.2014 making the following Disallowances: (i) Replacement of parts of machines treated as capital expenditure; (ii) claim of deduction u/s.80IA of the IT Act. (iii) Disallowance under s.14A (iv) In computation of Book Profit u/s. 115JB (v) claim of deduction under 43B (for A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11) & (vi) depreciation on Managing Director’s residence

GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

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

reassessment order was passed on 23.01.2014 making the following Disallowances: (i) Replacement of parts of machines treated as capital expenditure; (ii) claim of deduction u/s.80IA of the IT Act. (iii) Disallowance under s.14A (iv) In computation of Book Profit u/s. 115JB (v) claim of deduction under 43B (for A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11) & (vi) depreciation on Managing Director’s residence

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

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

reassessment order was passed on 23.01.2014 making the following Disallowances: (i) Replacement of parts of machines treated as capital expenditure; (ii) claim of deduction u/s.80IA of the IT Act. (iii) Disallowance under s.14A (iv) In computation of Book Profit u/s. 115JB (v) claim of deduction under 43B (for A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11) & (vi) depreciation on Managing Director’s residence

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

80G of the Act. The AO further observed that the recipients did not show the amount as taxable receipts but accounted as donations. 24.3. The AO also noticed that the assessee has also not deducted TDS on such expenditure, therefore the same cannot be allowed as deduction u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, the AO disallowed the said