DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

capital gain in the event the assessee makes the sale of its bungalow in dispute. It is because the revenue has not doubted on the incurrence of such expenses while framing the assessment. Besides the above, all the necessary details of the construction expenses were made available to the authorities below along with the addresses and the payments were made

M/S. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD. ( AMALGAMATING COMPANY EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT. CIT, RANGE-3,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Capital expenditures are often employed to improve operational efficiency, increase revenue in the long term, or make improvements to the existing assets of a company. Capital spending is different from other types of spending that focus on short-term operating expenses, such as overhead expenses or payments to suppliers and creditors. 115.2 Depreciation is used to expense the fixed asset

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN ANAGRAM STOCK BROKING LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Capital expenditures are often employed to improve operational efficiency, increase revenue in the long term, or make improvements to the existing assets of a company. Capital spending is different from other types of spending that focus on short-term operating expenses, such as overhead expenses or payments to suppliers and creditors. 115.2 Depreciation is used to expense the fixed asset

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. EDELWEISS BROKING LTD., AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Capital expenditures are often employed to improve operational efficiency, increase revenue in the long term, or make improvements to the existing assets of a company. Capital spending is different from other types of spending that focus on short-term operating expenses, such as overhead expenses or payments to suppliers and creditors. 115.2 Depreciation is used to expense the fixed asset

JECHINS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED (IN LIQN.),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is, thus, allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

gain which arose from transfer of capital asset which could be brought to tax under Section 45 r.w.s 48 of the Act. While dealing with the matter the Hon’ble Apex Court has been pleased to observe as follows:- “19. It is also well-settled by this Court that the protection provided under Section 53A is only a shield

CHUDABHAI LAXMNABHAI DESAI,,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD -6(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

144 rws 147 dated 25.02.2014 has computed capital gains on premises:- "5. As per AIR details available with the department the assessee along with three others sold land of Rs. 72,50,000/-. The assessee did not respond to the notices issued and/or filed reply giving the details in respect of working of capital gain. Therefore, as stated above

RAJESHBHAI BHAGWANDAS PATEL,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5 (3) (2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, and the assessment order is quashed

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13

capital gain under section 48 by taking cost of acquisition and cost of improvement as nil, since no evidence had been furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. The reassessment was accordingly framed under section 144

SHRI RAMESHKUMAR TRIKAMLAL PADHIYAR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.322/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Shri Rameshkumar Trikamlal Padhiyar Vs. Jcit, Cir.7 B-604, Prayag Apts., Ahmedabad. Opp: Nirma Vihar School Bodakdev Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Ackpp 6965 H

section 143(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. A perusal of the record would indicate that the assessee has declared income from house property at Rs.13,17,195/-, income from business and profession of Rs.2,03,09,661/-, long term capital gain of Rs.1,67,17,396/-, short term capital gain of Rs.99

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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 and 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost (iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

VIPUL MANSUKHBHAI BHIMANI,NIZAMPURA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(3), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vipul Mansukhbhai Bhimani, Income Tax Officer, 29/D, Suvernarekha Society, Vs Ward 1(3)(3), Nr. Mehsana Nagar Society, Vadodara Nizampura, Gujarat-390002 Pan : Acfpb 6160 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Ms. M.M. Garg, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/10/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” in short) was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee on 30.09.2014 . In the return of income filed for the year under consideration, a Long Term Capital Gain as worked out at Rs.14,580/- arising from the sale of land at 207, Moje Tandalja was declared

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

Appeal are dismissed

capital gains under sections 45\nand 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost\n(iii) there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding\nindexation\n(iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income,\ncontrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court\nin CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

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

Appeal are dismissed

capital gains under sections 45\nand 48 necessarily requires substitution of cost with indexed cost\n(iii)\nthere is no express bar in section 115JB excluding\nindexation\n(iv)\ndenying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income,\ncontrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court\nin CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144

RAMSINHJI MERAJI VANZARA,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

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

section 54B(2). 8. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The undisputed facts from the record are that:- (i) the purchase deed for the new agricultural land was executed on 14.08.2019, (ii) the cheques for the entire consideration were issued on the same date and (iii) the assessee maintained adequate