THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS 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.

capital gain - Held, yes 7. Anand M.Fatehpuria HUF Vs. ACIT [ 153 ITD 145 (Mumbai)] Section 28(i), read with section

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.

capital gain - Held, yes 7. Anand M.Fatehpuria HUF Vs. ACIT [ 153 ITD 145 (Mumbai)] Section 28(i), read with section

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.

capital gain - Held, yes 7. Anand M.Fatehpuria HUF Vs. ACIT [ 153 ITD 145 (Mumbai)] Section 28(i), read with section

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-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.

capital gain - Held, yes 7. Anand M.Fatehpuria HUF Vs. ACIT [ 153 ITD 145 (Mumbai)] Section 28(i), read with section

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.

capital gain - Held, yes 7. Anand M.Fatehpuria HUF Vs. ACIT [ 153 ITD 145 (Mumbai)] Section 28(i), read with section

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

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, AHMEDABAD vs. JHAVERI SANDEEP BIPINCHANDRA (HUF), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2016-17 Jhaveri Sandeep Income Tax Officer, Vs. Bipinchandra (Huf), Ward-5(3)(1), 21, Crest Nutan Laxmi Soc., Ahmedabad 9Th Road, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400049 Pan : Aachj 0855 Q अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Pune-12 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 24.08.2023 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. 2. Ground Of Appeal No.1 Raised By The Department Reads As Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Treating The Income Of Rs. 54,49,539/- As Short Term Capital Gain Instead Of Business Income.” 3. The Issue Raised In The Above Ground Relates To The Short Term Capital Gain Returned By The Assessee, On The Transactions Of Dealing In Shares, As Ito Vs Jhaveri Sandeep Bipinchandra Huf Ay : 2016-17 2

Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the Department reads as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in treating the income

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

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASMAN INVESTMENTS LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground No.2 of the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3138/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

145/- and there was no justification for the CIT(A) to restrict the same to the extent of exempt income by way of dividend amounting to Rs.41,250/-. We find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt.Ltd

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 Gains under section 10(38) of the Act, treating the underlying shares as "penny stocks"; and (iv) Addition on account of alleged on-money received on the sale of property in the Earth Erita project. These additions were made based on material allegedly found during the search action, including digital data like WhatsApp chats retrieved from third-party mobile

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DHARMENDRA C SHAH- HUF, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

gain by the investigation wing of Income Tax Kolkata. The name of the Sunrise Asian Ltd included in the list of 84 scrip identified by the Investigation wing as penny stock which was utilized for providing bogus long term capital or loss to the beneficiaries after conducting country wide investigation on various brokers, entry provider and sub-broker

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DEVARSH DHARMENDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

gain by the investigation wing of Income Tax Kolkata. The name of the Sunrise Asian Ltd included in the list of 84 scrip identified by the Investigation wing as penny stock which was utilized for providing bogus long term capital or loss to the beneficiaries after conducting country wide investigation on various brokers, entry provider and sub-broker

SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 20(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

gains of business'. (b) The learned CIT (A) also erred in not appreciating that all the above receipts/incomes are arising from business activities and hence derived from the business of industrial undertaking.” 2. The first issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowances of deduction under section 80IA

DCIT, CIR.1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. AWN AGRO PVT. LTD., 2014-15

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee both are dismissed

capital transaction. Further, it is observed that Instruction No. 03/2010 issued by CBDT dated 23/03/2010 relied by Assessing Officer refers to disallowance of loss arising on account of foreign exchange derivative transactions whereas in the case of Appellant, the said loss was on account of reinstatement of debtors and creditors on balance sheet date and such loss is accounted

M/S. GUJARAT SMELTING AND PEFINING CO. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2014-15 Gujarat Smelting & Refining Co. Ltd. Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) C/O. Vinit Moondra Ca Vs Ahmedabad. 201, Sarap Opp: Navjivan Press, Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 014. Pan : Aaacg 7566 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

section 145(3) of the Act and denied the business loss of Rs.72,63,457.00 to be set off against the short- term capital gain

SHRI DASHRATH AMBALAL PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -7(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 296/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Dashrath Ambalal Patel, Ito, बनाम/ 9, Jashwant Society, Ward – 7(2), Vs. Jodhpur Char Rasta, Satellite, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad – 380 015. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akypp 5852 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Mehul Talera, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri N. J. Vyas, Sr. D.R.

capital gain at Rs.957447/-. The A.O. also not doubted about transaction of investment of Rs.11,11,000/- in a house property but only on the fact that for the same property the registration deed was made on 10.10.11, the time limit as stipulated under section 54F of the Act was not adhered hence the deduction was rejected. The appellant emphatically