PARK PARADISE,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member\nAnd Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA Nos.207 & 208/Ahd/2022\nAssessment Year 2017-18\nPark Plaza\nNr. Saurabh Park,\nGotri-Samata, Road,\nGotri Vadodara\nGujarat-390021\nPAN: AAPFP6647K\nVs\nThe PCIT,\nVadodara-1,\nVadodara\nPark Paradise\nPlot No. 75,\nNr. Billa Bong School,\nVadsar, Vadodara\nGujarat-390010\nPAN: AASFP0787D\n(Appellant)\nVs\nThe PCIT,\nVadodara-1,\nVadodara\n(Respondent)\nAssessee Represented: Shri M.J. Shah, Adv. &\nS

391 (GUJARAT) held that in case of\nsubstantive amendment, retrospective operation can be given only if it is\nfor the benefit of the assessee but not in a case where it affects even a\nfewer section of the assesses.\nSimilarly in (2015) Tax Corp (DT) 60727 (HC-GUJARAT) NIKO\nRESOURCES LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA the Hon. Gujarat

PARK PLAZA,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member\nAnd Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\n\nITA Nos.207 & 208/Ahd/2022\nAssessment Year 2017-18\n\n| Park Plaza\n| Nr. Saurabh Park,\n| Gotri-Samata, Road,\n| Gotri Vadodara\n| Gujarat-390021\n| PAN: AAPFP6647K\n| Park Paradise\n| Plot No. 75,\n| Nr. Billa Bong School,\n| Vadsar, Vadodara\n| Gujarat-390010\n| PAN: AASFP0787D\n| (Appellant)\n\n| The PCIT,\n| Vadodara-1,\nVs Vadodara\n\n| Vs The PCIT,\n| Vadodara-1,\n| Vadodara\n| (Respondent)\n\nA

391 (GUJARAT) held that in case of\nsubstantive amendment, retrospective operation can be given only if it is\nfor the benefit of the assessee but not in a case where it affects even a\nfewer section of the assesses.\n\nSimilarly in (2015) Tax Corp (DT) 60727 (HC-GUJARAT) NIKO\nRESOURCES LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA the Hon. Gujarat

SAVLI TALUKA SECONDARY AND HIGHER SECONDARY EMPLOYEES CO OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1772/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Savli Taluka Secondary & The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Higher Secondary Employees Ward-1(2)(2) V/S. Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vadodara – 390 007 18, Rayakaka Park Savli Desar Road Vadodara – 391 770. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aafas 6647 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket Bakshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm:

391 770. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAFAS 6647 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanket Bakshi, AR Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JM: The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order

M/S. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

68 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. As regards additional ground, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer while reopening the assessment has reviewed the original assessment order and, therefore, the review of the original assessment

SIMENS HEALTHCASE DIAGNOSTICS LIMITED ( THROUGH SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST SIEMENS LIMITED ),,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT, VADODARA-2,, VADODARA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1442/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09) Simens Healthcare The Principal बनाम/ Diagnostics Limited Commissioner Of Income Vs. (Through Successor In Tax Interest Siemens Limited) Vadodara-2 Birla Aurora, Level 21, Plot No. 1080, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai - 400030 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb8542M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jet Kamar, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing 14/03/2024 03/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.03.2015 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vadodara-2 (‘Pcit’), Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As To ‘The Act’), Whereby & Whereunder The Assessment Order Dated 23.10.2012 Passed By The Acit, Circle-4, Baroda (In Short ‘Ao’) Has Been Directed To

68,141/- under Section 40A(i) & Rs.13,23,376/- under Section 14A of the Act for Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently argued against the order passed by the Ld. PCIT on the ground of jurisdictional error to this effect that once

JCIT(OSD), CIR-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE (INDIA) LTD, HARYANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 sanctioned by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court as non-qualifying demerger and artificially rewriting the transaction of demerger of an undertaking as deemed release I distribution of assets by the Appellant to its shareholders as dividend under provisions of section 2(22) of the Act. 2.2 Without prejudice to above

RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,),HARYANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 sanctioned by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court as non-qualifying demerger and artificially rewriting the transaction of demerger of an undertaking as deemed release I distribution of assets by the Appellant to its shareholders as dividend under provisions of section 2(22) of the Act. 2.2 Without prejudice to above

SHALIN RAJENDRAKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

391 69,582,955 Cash Deposited in Bank 22,073,267 29,700,000 6,204,000 57,977,267 6. Per contra, Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue supported the orders passed by the lower authorities and requested to uphold the same. I.T.A No. 1548/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No 7 Shalin Rajendrakumar Shah

SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

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

391 to 394 of Companies Act, 1956 vide order dated 03.05.2013 in Company claim Petition No. 283 of 2013 and also by the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court vide order dated 03.05.2013 [pages 679 to 682 of the Paper Book] in Company Petition No. 31 of 2013 connected with the Company Application No. 373 of 2012. The assets received

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

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

391 to 394 of Companies Act, 1956 vide order dated 03.05.2013 in Company claim Petition No. 283 of 2013 and also by the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court vide order dated 03.05.2013 [pages 679 to 682 of the Paper Book] in Company Petition No. 31 of 2013 connected with the Company Application No. 373 of 2012. The assets received

PRABHUDAS CHHITABHAI PATEL,CHAROLA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

391 135. [PAN – ALQPP 5387 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR (Adjournment Application filed) Date of Hearing 21.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 19.12.2024 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 16.07.2024 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appal Centre (NFAC

SINGULARITY LABS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2019-2020 Singularity Labs Private Limited Ito, Ward-4(1)(1) A Wing, Unit No.105 Vs. Ahmedabad- 380 Building No.1-A, Aqualine Properties 015. Pvt.Ltd. It/Ites Sez, Koba Gandhinagar – 382 421 Pan : Aaycs 8711 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Assessee By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am:

68,169/- and paid tax thereon. The claim of deduction under section 10AA was duly reflected in the return of income and in the tax audit report in Form 3CD under the relevant clause. 3. In the course of processing the return under section 143(1) of the Act, the CPC issued a communication dated 31.12.2019 proposing adjustment

RAJU BABABHAI DESAI ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:- “I. Assessment u/s 144 of the Act and Non-Granting of adequate opportunity of hearing by the Assessing Officer. Raju Bababhai Desai Vs. ITO Asst. Year

MAHESHRAJ CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.791/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 Dcit, Mahesraj Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Vs. 141, Phase Ii, Gidc, Vatva, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382330 Pan:Aabcm0424C

68,2817- .the Assessing Officer's action of excluding the same is confirmed as the export turnover of the appellant is more than Rs. 10 crores and the appellant has not proved that it has satisfied the two conditions and as per Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act 2005, the appellant has to prove following conditions:- (a) He had an option

ARJUNSINH RANA, VADODARA,TUNDAV SAVLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(1)(3)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2010-11

391 775, Vadodara, Gujarat. (Previous Jurisdiction: ITO, Vs. [PAN – CIQPR 7433 C] Ward (1)(3)(3), Vadodara – 390 007. (Gujarat) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sunil Talati, AR Revenue by Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.08.2025 O R D E R PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

391–394 of the Companies Act, 1956, with the appointed date being 01.04.2014. It was emphasised that the scheme of amalgamation was scrutinised by the Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, who had invited comments from the Income Tax Department in terms of Circular No. 1/2014 dated 15.01.2014, and that no objection had been raised by the Department

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

391–394 of the Companies Act, 1956, with the appointed date being 01.04.2014. It was emphasised that the scheme of amalgamation was scrutinised by the Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, who had invited comments from the Income Tax Department in terms of Circular No. 1/2014 dated 15.01.2014, and that no objection had been raised by the Department

NIRMA LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCTI , CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

391 and 394 of\nthe Companies Act, 1956, whereby several associate and\nsubsidiary companies were amalgamated with the assessee with\neffect from 01.04.2014. In the same scheme, the Healthcare\nDivision of the assessee was demerged and transferred to Aculife\nHealthcare Pvt. Ltd. with effect from 01.10.2014.\n3. For the Assessment Year 2015–16, the assessee filed its\noriginal return