INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FURNISH HOME, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), wherein detailed submissions supported by the books of accounts, statutory returns, confirmation and other documentary evidences were filed. A remand report of the AO was sought on the same by the Ld. CIT(A) after considering which, Ld. CIT(A) deleted

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Briefly stated, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading in furniture and furnishings. For the impugned year, the assessee had filed return of income declaring loss of Rs.2

FURNISH HOME,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1) OLD WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Briefly stated, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of trading in furniture and furnishings. For the impugned year, the assessee had filed return of income declaring loss of Rs.2

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

482 provide and discuss the concept of transfer pricing. Section 1.482-5 of the US Transfer Pricing Regulations state that 'the tested party will be the participant in the controlled transaction whose operating profit attributable to the controlled transactions can be verified using the most reliable data and requiring the fewest and most reliable adjustments, and for which reliable

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

482 provide and discuss the concept of transfer pricing. Section 1.482-5 of the US Transfer Pricing Regulations state that 'the tested party will be the participant in the controlled transaction whose operating profit attributable to the controlled transactions can be verified using the most reliable data and requiring the fewest and most reliable adjustments, and for which reliable

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)

482/-. Thus cash sales made was from the stocks available with the assessee. 2.1. This submission of the assessee was not accepted by the assessing officer on the ground that the cash in hand on 08-11- 2015 for A.Y. 2016-17 amounting to Rs.23.63 Lakhs, whereas for the present Asst. Year 2017-18 amounting to Rs.297.52 Lakhs, hence there

KANKUBEN UDESINGH MACHI(PROP. SUNNY SCRAP TRADERS),VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod M Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 68 of the Act which was, in turn, confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. Hence, the instant appeal before us. 6. It appears from the records that while confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO, the Ld. CIT(A) came to a finding that the bank statements of all Kankuben Udesingh Machi vs. ITO Asst.Year

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

68 taxmann.com 322, held that AE’s are accepted as tested party being the least complex for comparability analysis of international transaction of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: “18. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. We have also perused the relevant paragraphs of the several documents relied upon before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP ORGANISERS PVT LTD , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

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

482 & 435/Ahd/2023 Asst Year: 2019-20 The ACIT M/s. Sankalp Organisers Central Circle-1(2), Private Limited Ahmedabad Vs Sur. No. 207/20,F.P. No. 271/2, Sankalp House, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054 PAN: AAMCS2406H I.T.(SS)A No. 47 to 52/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2018-19 Page No 2 Sankalp Organizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

SANKALP ORGANISERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

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

482 & 435/Ahd/2023 Asst Year: 2019-20 The ACIT M/s. Sankalp Organisers Central Circle-1(2), Private Limited Ahmedabad Vs Sur. No. 207/20,F.P. No. 271/2, Sankalp House, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054 PAN: AAMCS2406H I.T.(SS)A No. 47 to 52/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2018-19 Page No 2 Sankalp Organizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

SANKALP VENTURE LLP,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

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

482 & 435/Ahd/2023 Asst Year: 2019-20 The ACIT M/s. Sankalp Organisers Central Circle-1(2), Private Limited Ahmedabad Vs Sur. No. 207/20,F.P. No. 271/2, Sankalp House, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054 PAN: AAMCS2406H I.T.(SS)A No. 47 to 52/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2018-19 Page No 2 Sankalp Organizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP VENTURE LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals in IT(SS)A No

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

482 & 435/Ahd/2023 Asst Year: 2019-20 The ACIT M/s. Sankalp Organisers Central Circle-1(2), Private Limited Ahmedabad Vs Sur. No. 207/20,F.P. No. 271/2, Sankalp House, B/h. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380054 PAN: AAMCS2406H I.T.(SS)A No. 47 to 52/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2018-19 Page No 2 Sankalp Organizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-4, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. MASTEK LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

482 is inconsistent with its treatment of guarantee fees under other provisions. See P.L.R. 9410008 (Dec. 13, 1993). 39But cf Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 541, 579 (1993) (Fannie Mae provided services by buying mortgages). 37. We are in agreement with these views. There can thus be activities which benefit the group entities but these

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. MASTEK LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

482 is inconsistent with its treatment of guarantee fees under other provisions. See P.L.R. 9410008 (Dec. 13, 1993). 39But cf Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 541, 579 (1993) (Fannie Mae provided services by buying mortgages). 37. We are in agreement with these views. There can thus be activities which benefit the group entities but these

MASTEK LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, (OSD) - 1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

482 is inconsistent with its treatment of guarantee fees under other provisions. See P.L.R. 9410008 (Dec. 13, 1993). 39But cf Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 541, 579 (1993) (Fannie Mae provided services by buying mortgages). 37. We are in agreement with these views. There can thus be activities which benefit the group entities but these

MASTEK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANG4,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

482 is inconsistent with its treatment of guarantee fees under other provisions. See P.L.R. 9410008 (Dec. 13, 1993). 39But cf Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 541, 579 (1993) (Fannie Mae provided services by buying mortgages). 37. We are in agreement with these views. There can thus be activities which benefit the group entities but these

THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SHREYANSHNATH DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2007-08 Ito, Ward-3(2)(5) Shree Shreyansnath Developers Ahmedabad. Vs Block No.832, Binor Bungalows Ghuma Gam Tal. Daskroi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaxfs 3932 L

482/- 11 Labour Expenses 59,36,763/- 12 Opening WIP 1,68,95,026/- 13 Transportation and Carting Expenditure 98,400/- 1.1 A complete account with sample copy of invoices is attached herewith from which it is found that, there is no fix price paid by us for any expenditure for year 31.03.2007, there is opening

RAJENDRA KHODIDAS PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 500/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-18) Rajendrakhodidas Patel Dcit बनाम/ Ambica Bhuvan, Baliya Circle –2(1)(1), Vs. Vas, Amraiwadi Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380026 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaspp5754G (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Shriparin S Shah, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondentby: Date Of Hearing 24/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06/11/2024 O R D E R Per Shrinarendra Prasad Sinha, Am:

Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) on the basis of specific information received from Investment Wing, Ahmedabad. In the course of reopened proceeding, the assessee had filed return of income in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act, but thereafter no compliance was made on any occasion. Therefore, the AO had passed order

THE DCIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. TORRENT PVT. LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

482 expenses Total Administrative 1,85,71,991 1,55,25,926 Expense B. Interest Expenditure Particulars Total Expenses claimed Remarks Expenses Interest 11,34,19,004 10,12,50,821 Rs.1,21,68,184/- pertaining to Expense IDFC Loan I already disallowed in view of the above, it is dear that out of total expenditure of Rs.13