ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

ENVIRO TECHNOLOGY LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX., BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

4 ITA 2018/Ahd/2014 Enviro Technology Ltd. Vs ACIT &7Ors. appeals recorded that on verification of record, it was found that the assessee was prima facie not eligible for deduction under Section 80IA of the Act”. In response to notice under Section 148, the assessee filed return of income on 20/04/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 73,25,530/- and claimed

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

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ADDL.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,,ANKLESHWAR vs. ACIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

BHARUCH ENVIRO INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE DY.CIT,BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

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

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

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

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled for deduction under section 80I-A(4)(i)(b) in respect for Landfill Project 1 since it is not a 'new' undertaking as per provisions of section 80- IA(4

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

4. During the pendency of appeal of the assessee before the Tribunal, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147 by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 27.03.2013. In response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee vide its letter dated 27.03.2013 requested for reasons recorded. The reasons recorded was supplied

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

4. During the pendency of appeal of the assessee before the Tribunal, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147 by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 27.03.2013. In response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee vide its letter dated 27.03.2013 requested for reasons recorded. The reasons recorded was supplied

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

4. During the pendency of appeal of the assessee before the Tribunal, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147 by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 27.03.2013. In response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee vide its letter dated 27.03.2013 requested for reasons recorded. The reasons recorded was supplied

SANMUKHLAL NANUBHAI MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

4. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO referred the matter to DVO, Surat on 24.11.2015 for determination of valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 in terms of provisions of section 55A as the assessee has taken valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 at Rs. 380/- per sq.mtrs on the basis of valuation report of Government approved

MADHUBEN DILIPBHAI MODI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

4. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO referred the matter to DVO, Surat on 24.11.2015 for determination of valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 in terms of provisions of section 55A as the assessee has taken valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 at Rs. 380/- per sq.mtrs on the basis of valuation report of Government approved

NITIN KUMAR GAMANLAL MODI HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

4. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO referred the matter to DVO, Surat on 24.11.2015 for determination of valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 in terms of provisions of section 55A as the assessee has taken valuation of the property as on 01.04.1981 at Rs. 380/- per sq.mtrs on the basis of valuation report of Government approved