BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs.18,08,02,807/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs.18,08,02,807/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs.13,46,89,674/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs.13,46,89,674/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

ISS SHIPPING INDIA PVT. LTD., (AS AGENT FOR MAERSK TANKERS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD., SINGAPORE),NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

11 of this judgment on the issue that there was no dispute with regard to application to section 144C and the only issue was as to what should be done in cases in which the scheme of section 144C though admittedly applicable to the fact of the case was not adhered to. The ld. counsel has also placed reliance

ISS SHIPPING INDIA PVT. LTD., (AS AGENT FOR MAERSK TANKERS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD., SINGAPORE),NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),, RAJKOT

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

11 of this judgment on the issue that there was no dispute with regard to application to section 144C and the only issue was as to what should be done in cases in which the scheme of section 144C though admittedly applicable to the fact of the case was not adhered to. The ld. counsel has also placed reliance

M/S CHANDRAKANT H. KAKKAD,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, this ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

disallowing the exemption of Rs. 35,07,459/- as the claimed under Section 54F of the Act by the assessee. The order is, thus, quashed. Hence, assessee's appeal is allowed. 7.1 In the case of CIT v Rajesh Kumar Jalan [2006] 157 Taxman 398 (Gauhati), the High Court on similar facts held that assessee is eligible for claiming deduction

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs. 29,98,51,142/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 80IA(4) of the Act is to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Hence, the deduction claimed by the assessee company u/s.80IA(4) amounting to Rs. 29,98,51,142/- is hereby disallowed and withdrawn and added back to the taxable income of the assessee company

SHRI RAJKOT VISHASHRIMALI JAIN SAMAJ ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee in its computation of income. Accordingly, even if it were to be assumed that the assessee is not eligible to claim deduction u/s. 11 of the Act, even otherwise the expenses claimed by the assessee cannot be denied u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Finally, the counsel for the assessee agreed that

M/S MKC INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANJAR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

disallow the deduction u/s 80IA claimed by assessee j on all of the grounds given below (which were all necessary together): a) Assessee has not constructed or developed any infrastructure facility nor begins to operate any infrastructure facility, thus period for 80IA not started in light of 80IA(2); in fact except one no project is completed by the assessee

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

section 80IA(4) was disallowed by the Ld. Assessing Officer and also confirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals). 11. Similarly, for assessment

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

section 80IA(4) was disallowed by the Ld. Assessing Officer and also confirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals). 11. Similarly, for assessment

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

section 80IA(4) was disallowed by the Ld. Assessing Officer and also confirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals). 11. Similarly, for assessment

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

section 80IA(4) was disallowed by the Ld. Assessing Officer and also confirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals). 11. Similarly, for assessment

THE ITO, WARD-2 (1) (4),, RAJKOT vs. PATEL HIGHWAY MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 383/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 Patel Highway Management Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., 2Nd Floor, Patcon House, Vs. Ward-2(1)4, Kalwad Road, Rajkot. Kotecha Chowk, Rajkot.

disallowance made by the ''Ld.AO'' denying deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act at Rs.7,73,77,928/- 11. We observe that NHAI awarded the contract to operate maintain and transfer (OMT) for 118 kms of Palanpur to Radhanpur section

M/S BACKBONE PROJECTS LIMITED.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. BACKBONE PROJECTS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

11,12,14,16 & 19 by treating the assessee as a "Developer" of infrastructure projects instead of "Work Contractor" as treated by the Assessing officer. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and/or on facts in allowing the employers contribution to P.P. which is paid beyond the due date specified as per P.P. Act. 4) On facts