DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

148 of the Act declared an additional income of Rs. 35,14,940/- only. As such, the additional income offered by the assessee includes an amount Rs. 2 lakhs offered under the head in from other sources against cash deposit and remaining amount offered under the head short- term capital gain. The AO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

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 have been credited to the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. Once such gains form part of net profit, the computation of their quantum must necessarily follow the computation mechanism contained in section 48, which statutorily mandates indexation. Denial of indexation would artificially inflate book profit and result in MAT being levied

HIRAL TAPANKUMAR CHUDGAR,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA, GUJARAT

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

section 139(1) in respect to capital gain has declared income as stated below for Assessment Year: PARTICULARS AY 2018-19 SALE CONSIDERATION CG 65,87,059 COST OF ACQUISITION OF SHARE (1,18,73,513) AMOUNT OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS (52,86,454) LOSS CLAIMED IN CURRENTYEAR - LOSS C/F TO NEXT YEAR (52,86,454) LOSS

THAKORBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3(1)(1), VADODARA

148 dated 27.03.2015 after\nobtaining approval from the competent authority. During reassessment\nproceedings, the Assessing Officer issued several notices under section\n142(1) of the Act calling for details regarding the nature of land, distance\nfrom municipal limits and the alleged cash receipt of ₹1,05,72,000/-. The\nassessee objected to the reopening on legal grounds, contending that

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEHAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

148 of the Act issued by the AO for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2009-10 are held as valid, correct and in accordance with the provisions of law. 51. In view of the express language of the section 147 of the Act for reopening of cases up to 16 years in respect of foreign assets, the retrospective nature