BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 247 To 250 & 260/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 2018-19 & 2010-11 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Income-Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji Industrial Room No.311, 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Estate, Rajkot-36 003 Vs. Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.254 To 256/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Bhawani Industries India Llp Assistant Commissioner Of Income- C/1-B, 236/3 Gidc, Aji बनाम/ Tax, Cicle-2(1), Rajkot, Room No.311, Industrial Estate, Rajkot-36 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Race Vs. 003 Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfb 8046 R (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr & Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

section 801A, they were not claiming deduction on the basis that: Losses of pertaining to period earlier to initial assessment year have been set off against brought forward fosses notionally from the respective profit of the year while computing deduction u/s 801A. Hence, above named assessee have not claimed deduction u/s 80 IA for various wind mill units during

BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

BHAVANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP,RAJKOT vs. ADDI. CIT, RANGE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSINER OF IINCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BHAWANI INDUSTRIES INDIA LLP, RAJKOT

801A remain the same at Rs. 25000/- prior to 01.04.93 and after 01.04.93\n(Rs.12,500/- Firm +6250+6250 partner) by way of deleting words \"a partner of a\nfirm\" from section 80A(3) of the Act. Likewise firm & partners total income\n37500+37500-75000 also remains the same as per prior 01.04.93 firm's income. Thus\nby new scheme

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

801A(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of Name of the project project referred by CIT (Appeals) 1 Repairing of road 2 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 3 EE/B1/33/04-05 Repairing of road I.T.A Nos. 216, 217, 203 & 211/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page No 3 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT

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

801A(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of Name of the project project referred by CIT (Appeals) 1 Repairing of road 2 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 3 EE/B1/33/04-05 Repairing of road I.T.A Nos. 216, 217, 203 & 211/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page No 3 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT

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

801A(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of Name of the project project referred by CIT (Appeals) 1 Repairing of road 2 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 3 EE/B1/33/04-05 Repairing of road I.T.A Nos. 216, 217, 203 & 211/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page No 3 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT

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

801A(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of Name of the project project referred by CIT (Appeals) 1 Repairing of road 2 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 3 EE/B1/33/04-05 Repairing of road I.T.A Nos. 216, 217, 203 & 211/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07 Page No 3 M/s Classic Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT & ACIT

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 u/s.80IA(4) of the Act by observing as follows: The finding of the AO, while denying the claim of deduction, was focused - • That the letter of award has been allotted to the consortium of M/s. Patel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Katira Construction Ltd on the basis of the evaluation of the financial and technical capacity of both

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

801A(4) of the Income Tax Act, on disallowance of Rs. 24,50,554/- made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. 5. On legal and factual status of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. It is, therefore, prayed that the finding given in the order

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. KISHORE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

801A(4) of the Income Tax Act, on disallowance of Rs. 24,50,554/- made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. 5. On legal and factual status of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. It is, therefore, prayed that the finding given in the order

M/S. PATEL BRASS WORKS PVT. LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT-CIRCLE-5, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

801A of the Act. The claim was made during the course of the assessment proceedings and hence the rejection of the claim is not justified. 2. Without prejudice to ground no 1, The Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) erred in holding that the appellant cannot make a new claim during the assessment proceedings. 3. Without prejudice to ground

ALPHA HI-TECH FUEL LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SNR CIRCLE,, SURENDRANAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.68/Rjt/2009 (धििाधरणणवध/ Assessment Year 2005-06) Alpha Hi-Tech Fuel Limited, बिाम/ D.C.I.T, Station Road, Surendranagar Vs. Lakhtar, Dist. Surendranagar, Gujarat-382775 स्ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaca4258P (अपीला््/Appellant) (प्य््/ Respondent) अपीला््थरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R Shri B.D Gupta, Sr. D.R. प्य््करथरसे/Respondent By: सुिणाईकरतारीख/ Date Of Hearing 08/06/2023 घोवणाकरतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/09/2023 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:

disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of advertisement expenses of Rs.5 lacs without appreciating the fact that the appellant has not even claimed deduction for the same. The appellant craves leave to amend, modify, add or substitute the above grounds of appeal. The 1st issue raised by the assessee in ground number 1 is that the learned 3. CIT-A erred

SEABIRD MARINE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMNAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, JAMNAGAR, JAMANGAR

In the result, ground No.4 raised by the assessee is allowed

801A.\n6. Further, this issue has been decided by Hon'ble ITAT Rajkot in assessee's own case\nfor A.Y. 2006-2007, 2007-08 and 2008-09 and CIT(A) for AY 2013-14, 2012-13. 2011-\n12, 2010-11, 2009-10 where in appeal of the assessee is allowed holding that rental\nincome of the CFS is a part

FRIENDS SALT WORKS AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES,GANDHIDHAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 29.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows (ITA No. 99/Rjt/2023- A.Y. 2015-16) : “1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,63,690/- being the depreciation claimed

FRIENDS SALT WORKS & ALLIED INDS.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE GANDHIDHAM,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 29.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows (ITA No. 99/Rjt/2023- A.Y. 2015-16) : “1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,63,690/- being the depreciation claimed