M/S COPER CO. OPERATIVE SUGAR LTD,TAPI vs. ITO WARD-2, BARDOLI

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.24/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S Coper Co-Operative Sugar Ltd., Vs. Ito, At & Post - Dadariya, Tal – Valod, Dist – Ward – 2, Tapi - 394630 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaac5824F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Akshay M. Modi, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/11/2025

section 250(6) of the Act is liable to be struck down. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the learned CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred both on facts and in law in deciding the ITA No.24/SRT/2025/AY.2014-15 M/s Coper Co-op. Sugar Ltd. appeal ex parte in violation of the principle

KIRTIPRADA FASHIONS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD -1(1)(3), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation and amortization has significantly increased for the year as compared to preceding year as can be seen in the table shown below: Assessment Year. 2012-13 Kritiprada Fashion P Ltd. A.Y. Net Profit/ (Loss) (Rs.) Cash Profit (Rs.) 2011-12 (67,74,595) 18,13,564 2012-13 5,88,362 1,08,82,127 Thus, ld Counsel submits

SHRI GORDHANBHAI R. ASODARIA,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Gordhanbhai R. Asodaria, A.C.I.T., 8, Raghuvir Bunglow, City Light Road, Central Circle-3, Vs. Parle Point, Surat-395007. Surat. Pan No. Abapa 6910 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

260/- which was declared initially while filing return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. The case of assessee was reopened by the Assessing Officer by recording reasons that on perusal of record, it was noticed that during the year under consideration, the assessee has shown profit received from firm Raghuvir Developers & Builders

ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LIMITED,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ACIT.,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharuch Enviro Deputy Commissioner Of Infrastructure Ltd.117-118, Income Tax, Bharuch Vs Gidc Estate-393002 Circle, Pan : Aaacb 8075 F Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

260/-. The assessee while filing return of income declared income of Rs.22,41,941/-. The assessee in the computation of income also claimed deduction under section 80IA of Rs. 1.15 Crore. The Assessing Officer while passing assessment order disallowed part of the deduction under section 80IA, thereby restricting it to Rs. 1.01 Crore. The assessing officer also disallowed sludge disposal

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharuch Enviro Deputy Commissioner Of Infrastructure Ltd.117-118, Income Tax, Bharuch Vs Gidc Estate-393002 Circle, Pan : Aaacb 8075 F Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

260/-. The assessee while filing return of income declared income of Rs.22,41,941/-. The assessee in the computation of income also claimed deduction under section 80IA of Rs. 1.15 Crore. The Assessing Officer while passing assessment order disallowed part of the deduction under section 80IA, thereby restricting it to Rs. 1.01 Crore. The assessing officer also disallowed sludge disposal

ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE-2,, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharuch Enviro Deputy Commissioner Of Infrastructure Ltd.117-118, Income Tax, Bharuch Vs Gidc Estate-393002 Circle, Pan : Aaacb 8075 F Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

260/-. The assessee while filing return of income declared income of Rs.22,41,941/-. The assessee in the computation of income also claimed deduction under section 80IA of Rs. 1.15 Crore. The Assessing Officer while passing assessment order disallowed part of the deduction under section 80IA, thereby restricting it to Rs. 1.01 Crore. The assessing officer also disallowed sludge disposal

KALUBHAI DULABHAI GOLAVIYA,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, , SURAT

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.15 & Ita No.619/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 &2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Kalubhai Dulabhai Golaviya Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, B/1-2, Jalaram Society, B/H. Central Circle-2, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Gurunagar Society, Varachha Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Road, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 5116 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

260. It has been held by Apex Court that: "....The fact that the capital gains are connected within the capital assets of the business cannot make them the profit of the business. They are only deemed to be income of the previous year and not the profits or gains rising from the business during that year". g. The stand

M/S. VALENTINE CINE VISION LIMITED,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4),, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

depreciation at only half of the applicable rate was to be allowed. The Assessing Officer also made an addition of Rs. 1,29,837/- on account of unexplained premium towards Key man insurance policy. The assessment was completed at Nil after giving the benefit of set off of brought forward losses to the tune of Rs. 4,78,78,260

THE ITO, WARD-4(4),, SURAT vs. M/S. VALENTINE CINE VISION LIMITED,, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

depreciation at only half of the applicable rate was to be allowed. The Assessing Officer also made an addition of Rs. 1,29,837/- on account of unexplained premium towards Key man insurance policy. The assessment was completed at Nil after giving the benefit of set off of brought forward losses to the tune of Rs. 4,78,78,260