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

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 801A of the Appellant on the ground that 'Interest and Remuneration received by the partner cannot be said to have been derived from the business of an industrial undertaking (a) But it is a very well settled law that a firm is not a legal person even though it has same attributes of personality

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

disallowed the\nclaim of deduction u/s 801A of the Appellant on the ground that 'Interest and\nRemuneration received by the partner cannot be said to have been derived from the\nbusiness of an industrial undertaking\n(a) But it is a very well settled law that a firm is not a legal person even though it has\nsame attributes

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

7). Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society\nLtd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC).\n(8). Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co.\nLtd. (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC)\n(9). In Textile Machinery Corporation Limited v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 195 (SC).\n18.\nThe assessee further submitted before

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

7). Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society\nLtd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC).\n(8). Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co.\nLtd. (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC)\n(9). In Textile Machinery Corporation Limited v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 195 (SC).\n18. The assessee further submitted before

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

In the result, summarised and concise ground No

7). Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society\nLtd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC).\n(8). Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co.\nLtd. (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC)\n(9). In Textile Machinery Corporation Limited v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 195 (SC).\n18.\nThe assessee further submitted before

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

7). Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society\nLtd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC).\n(8). Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co.\nLtd. (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC)\n(9). In Textile Machinery Corporation Limited v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 195 (SC).\n18. The assessee further submitted before

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

7). Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society\nLtd, Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1989) 177 ITR 418 (SC).\n(8). Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing Co.\nLtd. (1992) 196 ITR 149 (SC)\n(9). In Textile Machinery Corporation Limited v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 195 (SC).\n18. The assessee further submitted before

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

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

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

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

7 SOT 164 (Mumbai Trib.) (xv) Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT [2002] 122\ntaxmann.om 562 (SC) (xvi) Azadi Bachao Andolan vs. UOI [132 Taxman 373]\n(SC) and (xvii) Banyan & Berry vs. CIT [1996] 222 ITR 831 (Guj).\n14. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue supported the order of\nlower authorities. The Ld. CIT-DR took