GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

bogus transaction or a colourable transaction. The assessee basically has not suffered any loss, rather long term capital loss arose account of indexation of cost, as the investment was long term investment. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has allowed the capital loss to the assessee, more so, this capital loss has not been claimed for set off in this year, rather

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

bogus transaction or a colourable transaction. The assessee basically has not suffered any loss, rather long term capital loss arose account of indexation of cost, as the investment was long term investment. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has allowed the capital loss to the assessee, more so, this capital loss has not been claimed for set off in this year, rather

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

bogus transaction or a colourable transaction. The assessee basically has not suffered any loss, rather long term capital loss arose account of indexation of cost, as the investment was long term investment. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has allowed the capital loss to the assessee, more so, this capital loss has not been claimed for set off in this year, rather

THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMEICALS LTD, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

bogus transaction or a colourable transaction. The assessee basically has not suffered any loss, rather long term capital loss arose account of indexation of cost, as the investment was long term investment. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has allowed the capital loss to the assessee, more so, this capital loss has not been claimed for set off in this year, rather

THA ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1,, BARODA vs. M/S. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,, BARODA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

bogus transaction or a colourable transaction. The assessee basically has not suffered any loss, rather long term capital loss arose account of indexation of cost, as the investment was long term investment. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) has allowed the capital loss to the assessee, more so, this capital loss has not been claimed for set off in this year, rather

SHRI PRAVIN SHIVLAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3),, BARODA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

bogus, it will lead to an absurd situation since sales of products purchased from these parties have already been treated as income Thus the sales related to these purchases will be taxed entirely without any deduction toward cost of purchases. What should be taxed is only net income. In case the purchases are added, what will be taxed will

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

business of manufacturing copper and copper-based products and had made purchases from suppliers after due verification, supported by copies of purchase invoices, ledger confirmations of parties, PAN and GST registration details, quantitative records of input/output, stock registers and evidence of payment through regular banking channels. The assessee pointed out that the purchases were duly accounted for in its books

SHRI HARISHBHAI KESHAVLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1180/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2006-2007

purchase of shares in a particular case should be treated as capital gain or as business income has been a debatable issue and there are conflicting decisions of the Tribunal on this issue. Each case is therefore, to be based on its own factual situation. In the balance sheet, the assessee has shown shares under the head 'investment'. These investment

MADHAV COPPER LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

business of manufacturing copper and copper-based products and had made purchases from suppliers after due verification, supported by copies of purchase invoices, ledger confirmations of parties, PAN and GST registration details, quantitative records of input/output, stock registers and evidence of payment through regular banking channels. The assessee pointed out that the purchases were duly accounted for in its books

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

business of manufacturing copper and copper-based products and had made purchases from suppliers after due verification, supported by copies of purchase invoices, ledger confirmations of parties, PAN and GST registration details, quantitative records of input/output, stock registers and evidence of payment through regular banking channels. The assessee pointed out that the purchases were duly accounted for in its books

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(8), BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. MADHAV COPPER LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, all six appeals, three by the Revenue and three by the assessee, stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

business of manufacturing copper and copper-based products and had made purchases from suppliers after due verification, supported by copies of purchase invoices, ledger confirmations of parties, PAN and GST registration details, quantitative records of input/output, stock registers and evidence of payment through regular banking channels. The assessee pointed out that the purchases were duly accounted for in its books

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. KIFS PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

KIFS SECURITIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE- 3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3,, AHMEDABAD vs. KIFS SECURITIES LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit

KIFS SECURITIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE- 3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

purchase, sales and closing stock. Inventory of equity shares i.e. stock in trade is valued at “cost or market price whichever is less”. There is no dispute to such disclosed income. Bone of contention relates to capital gain. Assessee has shown Short Term Capital and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of equity shares and has claimed the benefit