DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

capital gains under sections 45, 48 and 112 continue to apply unless expressly overridden. The Hon’ble High Court further

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT , BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

section 115JB(5), all other provisions of the Act—\nincluding those governing computation of long-term capital gains under\nsections 45, 48 and 112

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

section 115JB(5), all other provisions of the Act—\nincluding those governing computation of long-term capital gains under\nsections 45, 48 and 112

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. BHAVESHKUMAR GIRISHBHAI BHANDARI, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

Appeal is allowed in ITA 978/Ahd/2025 and ITA\n978/Ahd/2025 as well

Capital Gain of Rs. 14,63,004/-, which was\nclaimed as exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. The AO asked the\nassessee to explain why the LTCG should not be treated as bogus. In\nresponse, the assessee filed a reply dated 13.03.2023 and subsequently\nanother reply on 16.03.2023, contending that the notice was short-timed and\nthat

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

capital gain as alleged by the AO. It was submitted that AO has not brought any material evidence to rebut any of the evidence and the explanation given by the assessee. It was submitted that it is a typical case where there is absolutely no evidence to support the addition made by the AO, which appears to have been made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. GIRISHKUMAR AMRATLAL BHANDARI HUF, HIMATNAGAR, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of\nthe Assessing Officer is restored

Capital Gain of Rs.14,63,004/-, which was\nclaimed as exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. The AO asked the\nassessee to explain why the LTCG should not be treated as bogus. In\nresponse, the assessee filed a reply dated 13.03.2023 and subsequently\nanother reply on 16.03.2023, contending that the notice was short-timed and\nthat

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. BHAVESHKUMAR GIRISHBHAI BHANDARI, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of\nthe Assessing Officer is restored

Capital Gain of Rs.14,63,004/-, which was\nclaimed as exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. The AO asked the\nassessee to explain why the LTCG should not be treated as bogus. In\nresponse, the assessee filed a reply dated 13.03.2023 and subsequently\nanother reply on 16.03.2023, contending that the notice was short-timed and\nthat

GITABEN DINESHBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

112 taxmann.com 330 (SC)/[2020] 268 Taxman 320 (SC) dismissed the SLP against the findings of the Delhi High Court and ITAT that share transactions involving penny stock companies were bogus and that the purported long-term capital gains were to be treated as unexplained income. The Hon’ble Apex Court thereby affirmed that findings based on appreciation of evidence

OVEZ ARIFBHAI LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

112 taxmann.com 330 (SC). Thereafter, the ld. PCIT refers to the provisions of Section 263 read with Explanation 2 to section 263, and the various case laws , and thereafter, he came to the conclusion that Assessing Officer has erred in not verifying the issue of long term capital gain

DILIPKUMAR VITTHALDAS DESAI,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

Bench: The Tribunal Has Caused The Delay Of 87 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Assessee Enclosed The United States Passport Copy Of His Brother, Who Visited India In December 2023. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Stated In The Notarized Affidavit Thereby We Hereby Condone The Delay Of 87 Days In Filing The Above Appeals & Adjudicate The Cases On Merits.

Gain of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved against the reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay. The delay was condoned by the Ld. CIT(A) and after considering reply filed by the assessee and the Affidavit by Shri Mahesh Vitthaldas Desai and Smt. Smita Mahesh Desai dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee

DILIPKUMAR VITTHALDAS DESAI,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

Bench: The Tribunal Has Caused The Delay Of 87 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Assessee Enclosed The United States Passport Copy Of His Brother, Who Visited India In December 2023. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Stated In The Notarized Affidavit Thereby We Hereby Condone The Delay Of 87 Days In Filing The Above Appeals & Adjudicate The Cases On Merits.

Gain of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved against the reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay. The delay was condoned by the Ld. CIT(A) and after considering reply filed by the assessee and the Affidavit by Shri Mahesh Vitthaldas Desai and Smt. Smita Mahesh Desai dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsn

112 Income-tax, 1-4 to SPARC, Tandalja, /Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), 2009-10 Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 5 Industries Limited, ITA No. Income-tax, 2011-12 SPARC, Tandalja, 113/Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K 6-7 Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 2005-06 Industries

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsn

112 Income-tax, 1-4 to SPARC, Tandalja, /Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), 2009-10 Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 5 Industries Limited, ITA No. Income-tax, 2011-12 SPARC, Tandalja, 113/Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K 6-7 Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 2005-06 Industries

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsn

112 Income-tax, 1-4 to SPARC, Tandalja, /Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), 2009-10 Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 5 Industries Limited, ITA No. Income-tax, 2011-12 SPARC, Tandalja, 113/Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K 6-7 Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 2005-06 Industries