ANAND DILIPBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: 3

capital gain of Rs. 2,53,211/- in the return of income filed with the Department. Later, the assessee filed an application u/s. 154 6 I.T.A No. 898/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2021-22 Page No. Anand Dilipbhai Patel v. ITO for rectification

SURESH NATVARLAL ZINZUWADIA,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kmble

capital gains, but was only regarding Chapter VI-A deductions, hence no opportunity was given for LTCG adjustment. The appellant filed rectification u/s 154

MAUNANG FARMS PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(4),(NOW ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

u/s. 154 of the Act vide letter dated 09.01.2020 before the AO, however, the appellant company had not received any rectification order till date. (v) In the rectification application u/s.154 of the Act dated 09.01.2020, the appellant had contended that according to various judicial pronouncements by various courts if the difference between valuation adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority

SH. BHAVESHKUMAR GANSHYAM PATEL,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Shri Bhaveshkumar Ganshyam Patel Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) 446 Patel Faliya Vs. Vadodara. Moti Khadaki, Tb Sanatorium So Vadodara, Gujarat. Pan : Aunpp 1026 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Nikhita Bhamblani, Ca & Shri Virat Bhavsar, Ar : Ms.Urvashi Mandhan, Sr.Dr. Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /06/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

rectification order u/s 154 on 12.01.2022 wherein the FMV was determined at Rs.12,87,400/- (assessee’s 1/3rd share), and consequential long-term capital gain

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD vs. AIA ENGINEERING LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 397/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Dcit Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 532/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Acit, Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr Dr & Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

154 dt. 06.02.2020) on electrical fittings u/s 32 of the Act?" 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored". 3. At the outset itself

HETIKA MAYANKKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice(Retd.) C V Bhadang & Dr.Brr Kumar

capital gain and other sources etc. The assessee had filed her return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 29.08.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 34,07,250/-. It was processed u/s 143(1) on 27.03.2019 whereby the prima facie adjustment was made in respect of “Income from other sources” in as much as it was shown at Rs.10

DHIRAJLAL SAVAILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE AO,CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURIDICTION THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Final Hearing Of Appeal.”

capital gain tax on the same. The buyer of the land was also not required to make TDS on the same. However, the buyer of the land made TDS of Rs. 1,42,500/- by mistake. These are the submissions of the assessee before the CIT(A). The TDS was reflected in Form 26AS and therefore the assessee claimed credit

M/S. KANKARIA MANINAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Kankaria Maninagar Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nagarik Sahakari Bank Income Tax Vs. Circle – 6(1), Ahmedabad Ltd. Bhagwan Chamber, Maninagar Char Rasta, Maninagar, Ahmedabad 380008 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaak6862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Rahul Patel, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. While One Appeal Is Against Order U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), The Other One Is Against The Rectification Order U/S. 154 Of The Act. These Appeals Were Heard Together And

rectification order u/s. 154 of the Act. These appeals were heard together and ITA Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 (Kankaria Maninagar Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT) A.Y.– 2012-13 - 2 – are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee in this appeal are as under

M/S. KANKARIA MANINAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Kankaria Maninagar Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nagarik Sahakari Bank Income Tax Vs. Circle – 6(1), Ahmedabad Ltd. Bhagwan Chamber, Maninagar Char Rasta, Maninagar, Ahmedabad 380008 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaak6862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Rahul Patel, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. While One Appeal Is Against Order U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), The Other One Is Against The Rectification Order U/S. 154 Of The Act. These Appeals Were Heard Together And

rectification order u/s. 154 of the Act. These appeals were heard together and ITA Nos. 2349 & 2350/Ahd/2018 (Kankaria Maninagar Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT) A.Y.– 2012-13 - 2 – are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee in this appeal are as under

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act relating to the same Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 1001 & 1002/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Parvindar Indar Singh vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and doctor by profession specializing in the field of cardiology. For the Asst. Year

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act relating to the same Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 1001 & 1002/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Parvindar Indar Singh vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and doctor by profession specializing in the field of cardiology. For the Asst. Year

NIRAL KRUPESHBHAIPATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT ,CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed subject to the aforesaid aforesaid verification

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains, interest and share in profits received from various firms. During the impugned year under considereation, the assessee filed it’s return of income declaring total income of Rs.40,94,780/-. Thereafter, the assessee received a letter from CPC, Bangalore dated 03.05.2018 stating that there is a variation in income of Rs. 61,51,804/- as per return

ACIT ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. ELECON ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD, VALLABH VIDYANAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us.

rectification in terms of Section 154 of the Act. However, the AO did not agree with the contention of the assesse noting that the assessee had claimed this loss in Schedule CYLA row no (xviii) of the Income Tax Return and accordingly, passed order u/s.154 of the Act denying the carried forward of losses to the tune of Rs.2

ARVINDKUMAR AMULKH TANNA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (3), AHMEADABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

154 10,99,43,284 2,97,34,926 2,79,81,468 8,52,11,191 3,44,69,278 153A in Rs. Since the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the appeal in part, the Revenue is in appeal(s) before us, and the assessee filed two appeals and Cross Objections. Following are the grounds: 3. Grounds raised by the Revenue

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.572/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Gujarat State Electricity The Pr.Cit-1 Corporation Ltd. बनाम/ Vadodara – 390 015 Sardar Patel Vidhyut Bhavan V/S. Race Course Circle Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacg 6864 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah & Shri Jimi Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

capital grants, prior period items, liquidated damages, and others. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT-1 Asst. Year : 2015-16 3 2.4. Subsequently, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax–1, Vadodara, issued a notice under section 263 of the Act on 13.09.2019, proposing to revise the assessment on the ground that the AO failed to examine the allowability

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

rectification and allowed the deduction. Leave Encashment The AO disallowed the provision based on the Provision Supreme Court's judgment in Exide Industries, treating it as an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) partially allowed the deduction to the extent of actual payments made during the year, while retaining disallowance for unpaid amounts. ITA No.2815/Ahd/2011 and other 17 appeals JMC Projects

JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

rectification and allowed the deduction. Leave Encashment The AO disallowed the provision based on the Provision Supreme Court's judgment in Exide Industries, treating it as an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) partially allowed the deduction to the extent of actual payments made during the year, while retaining disallowance for unpaid amounts. ITA No.2815/Ahd/2011 and other 17 appeals JMC Projects

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

rectification and allowed the deduction. Leave Encashment The AO disallowed the provision based on the Provision Supreme Court's judgment in Exide Industries, treating it as an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) partially allowed the deduction to the extent of actual payments made during the year, while retaining disallowance for unpaid amounts. ITA No.2815/Ahd/2011 and other 17 appeals JMC Projects

THE ACIT,(OSD)-I,RANGE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

rectification and allowed the deduction. Leave Encashment The AO disallowed the provision based on the Provision Supreme Court's judgment in Exide Industries, treating it as an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) partially allowed the deduction to the extent of actual payments made during the year, while retaining disallowance for unpaid amounts. ITA No.2815/Ahd/2011 and other 17 appeals JMC Projects