THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ARVINDKUMAR SHRISHRIMAL, AHMEDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the assessee had provided details of purchase from each party and the specific rates. The AO had not questioned the purchase price and incorrectly applied an average price to calculate capital gains.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 44,69,147/- made by the AO. The AO had recomputed short-term capital gains by substituting the assessee's cost of acquisition with an average price per share, as the assessee had purchased shares of a private limited company from different persons at varying prices on the same date.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition made on account of short-term capital gains by re-calculating the cost of acquisition using an average price per share.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त ( अपील ) / The CIT(A)-4, Ahmedabad 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध , आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण , राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 6. गाड� फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//
सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad
Date of dictation (dictation pad attached with the file) : 01/03/2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the : 04/03/2024 Dictating Member. 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S : 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating : Member for pronouncement. 5. Date on which fair order placed before Other Member : 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the : 06.03.24 Sr.P.S./P.S. 06.03.24 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk. : 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk. : 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar : for signature on the order. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order :
ITO Ward-4(2)(1) vs. Shri Arvindkumar Shrishrimal Asst.Year 2013-14
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026