ITAT Surat Judgments — April 2022

SHRI VALLABHBHAI MOHANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 427/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources, and adjusted the cost of acquisition. It also directed the deletion of additions made on account of agricultural income, confirming the land's agricultural nature.

SHRI YOGESHKUMAR BACHUBHAI KHALASI,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 439/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources, and adjusted the cost of acquisition. It also directed the deletion of additions made on account of agricultural income, confirming the land's agricultural nature.

SHRI NARAYAN TULSIRAM SHARMA,SURAT vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(8), SURAT

ITA 265/SRT/2018[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals and partly allowed the Revenue's appeals, restricting the additions for bogus purchases to 6% based on consistency with a lead case.

SHRI PANKAJ KISHORCHANDRA DESAI,SURAT vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, SURAT

ITA 303/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that long-term capital gains exempt under Section 10(38) do not form part of the total income and therefore cannot be used for setting off long-term capital losses. The Assessing Officer's order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the revenue.

DILKHUSH BABEL,SURAT vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(7), SURAT

ITA 261/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2015-16Partly Allowed

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals and partly allowed the Revenue's appeals, restricting the additions for bogus purchases to 6% based on consistency with a lead case.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (3) (7), SURAT vs DILKHUSH BABEL, SURAT

ITA 1/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2012-13Partly Allowed

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals and partly allowed the Revenue's appeals, restricting the addition for bogus purchases to 6% based on consistency with a lead case.

SHRI AMBABEN JAMUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 3021/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was valid, stating that at the stage of reopening, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material, and the sufficiency or correctness of the material is not to be considered. The Tribunal dismissed the grounds challenging the validity of reopening. Regarding the compensation for built-up units/pucca houses, the Tribunal found that no evidence of cost of acquisition was furnished. The CIT(A) had estimated the cost at 50% of Rs. 13 lakh. The Tribunal increased this estimation to 60% of Rs. 13 lakh as the cost of acquisition, considering the location, and directed the Assessing Officer to assess under the head 'capital gain' with this revised cost. This ground was partly allowed. Concerning the agricultural income of Rs. 5,000/-, the Tribunal held that since the land was agricultural and used as such, the income offered as agricultural income was allowed, and the addition was directed to be deleted. This ground was allowed.

SMT. SHANTIBEN DIYALBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 2560/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI DINESHBHAI DAYALBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1648/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NAVINBHAI JERAMBHAI PATEL L/H OF LATE JERAMBHAI VALABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 1644/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI JAYESHBHAI PARBHUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1639/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NAVINBHAI PARBHUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 1645/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI ISHVERBHAI DEVJIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1623/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI SHANTILAL DAYALBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 2565/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. JASUBEN VENIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2178/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. RASHMIBEN RAJESHBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 2203/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI GANPATBHAI UKABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2207/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI RATILAL JERAMBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 2566/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI JAMUBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 369/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NAGINBHAI NARSINHBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 375/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI GIJUBHAI PRABHUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 422/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. JAMNABEN NAGINBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 424/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI HITESH DINESHBHAI L/H OF LATE DINESHBHAI LALLUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 379/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NATVARBHAI KANJIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 370/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. KAMUBEN CHHAGANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 428/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI PARSOTTAMBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 425/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI RATILAL UKABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 376/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI BACHUBHAI KANJIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 423/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI SANJAYBHAI DAHYABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1605/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI SATISHBHAI BHAGUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1622/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI GHANSHYAMBHAI NATVARBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1638/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. HANSABEN MADANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2206/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. BEBIBEN JAMUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2202/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI BHASKERBHAI JAMUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 2177/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. SHANTIBEN MANUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1608/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. KAMUBEN BHAGUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 1604/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NANUBHAI DAHYABHAI MAISURIYA,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 2559/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2009-10Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI HITESHBHAI JAMUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 371/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. MANIBEN GOVINDBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 368/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI SHANTILAL RATANJIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1606/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI CHHAGANBHAI RATANJIBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1640/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NATVARBHAI JERAMBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 1646/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI DAHYABHAI LALLUBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2199/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SMT. PADMABEN ANILBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2204/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI BHANABHAI GANDABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 2558/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI ULLASBHAI NATHABHAI BHATIA,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 421/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI NAGINBHAI BABARBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(3), SURAT

ITA 1647/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI GIRDHARBHAI RATANJIBHAI PATEL L/H. OF LATE RATANJIBHAI NARANBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), SURAT

ITA 1607/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI DINESHBHAI NAGINBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), SURAT

ITA 1624/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.

SHRI KANTIBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), SURAT

ITA 1641/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that compensation for constructed property on land should be treated as capital gains, not income from other sources. It also confirmed that agricultural income is not taxable if the land was used for agriculture. The cost of acquisition for built-up units was increased to 60% of the awarded amount.