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.

Capital 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

VINIT BIPINCHANDRA SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(3) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-5(2)(4)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

gain arising on sale of Murtidham flat and godown totaling to Rs.25,81,731/- was brought to tax. The Assessing Officer also noticed that the assessee had introduced fresh capital of Rs.27,77,700/- by way of sale of gold bar. It was explained that this gold bar purchased in the year 2001-02 at a cost of Rs.4

ROHIT PRAKASHCHANDRA SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2014-15

capital gains computation what is relevant is not only the sale of shares but also the purchase of shares. Therefore, the genuineness of the entire transaction of acquisition as well as sale of shares has to be looked into as a whole. One can't adopt a dissecting approach by accepting the sale of shares as genuine without examining

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gains on sale of agricultural land were not taxable, and accordingly reduced the default period to 12 months. The Revenue contended before the High Court that the Tribunal erred in accepting the assessee’s explanation for part of the delay. The Gujarat High Court, however, held that the existence of reasonable cause was a question of fact and that

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gains on sale of agricultural land were not taxable, and accordingly reduced the default period to 12 months. The Revenue contended before the High Court that the Tribunal erred in accepting the assessee’s explanation for part of the delay. The Gujarat High Court, however, held that the existence of reasonable cause was a question of fact and that

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gains on sale of agricultural land were not taxable, and accordingly reduced the default period to 12 months. The Revenue contended before the High Court that the Tribunal erred in accepting the assessee’s explanation for part of the delay. The Gujarat High Court, however, held that the existence of reasonable cause was a question of fact and that

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

gains derived from the activity of manufacturing. 24.2 On appeal by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) also confirmed the finding of the AO. 24.3 Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 24.4 The learned AR before us submitted that the grant received by it has direct nexus and therefore

HARSHIT INDRAVADANBHAI TALATI,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1301/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बनाम/ Harshit Indravadan Acit Talati Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara Vs. 1, Kotyark Society, B/H. Zaver Nagar Bus Stop, Waghodia Road, Baroda, Gujarat - 390019 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abipt6038Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri S N Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/12/2025 01/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information received by the AO, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2018. The AO has ITA No. 1301/Ahd/2024 (Harshit Indravadanbhai Talati vs. ACIT

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

163/- on which net profit of Rs.19,77,87,586/- was declared. The return of income was filed on 23.11.2012 declaring loss of Rs.(-) 11,67,17,728/-. The return was duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 06.08.2013 which was duly served

M/S. CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

163/- on which net profit of Rs.19,77,87,586/- was declared. The return of income was filed on 23.11.2012 declaring loss of Rs.(-) 11,67,17,728/-. The return was duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 06.08.2013 which was duly served

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

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

Gains of business or profession as well as Income from other sources which together constitute "two properties" held under the trust and the total moon thereof has been arrived at in the manner as held by ITAT Mumbai in the ne Prayagdham Trust Vs. CIT(E), Mumbai in ITA No. 3348(Mum) 2016 for A. 2011 pronounced on 07.08.2017 reported

DCIT(E), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

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

Gains of business or profession as well as Income from other sources which together constitute "two properties" held under the trust and the total moon thereof has been arrived at in the manner as held by ITAT Mumbai in the ne Prayagdham Trust Vs. CIT(E), Mumbai in ITA No. 3348(Mum) 2016 for A. 2011 pronounced on 07.08.2017 reported

DCIT (EXMP) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

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

Gains of business or profession as well as Income from other sources which together constitute "two properties" held under the trust and the total moon thereof has been arrived at in the manner as held by ITAT Mumbai in the ne Prayagdham Trust Vs. CIT(E), Mumbai in ITA No. 3348(Mum) 2016 for A. 2011 pronounced on 07.08.2017 reported

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE BOARD OF SCHOOL TEXT BOOK, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, both the M

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

Gains of business or profession as well as Income from other sources which together constitute "two properties" held under the trust and the total moon thereof has been arrived at in the manner as held by ITAT Mumbai in the ne Prayagdham Trust Vs. CIT(E), Mumbai in ITA No. 3348(Mum) 2016 for A. 2011 pronounced on 07.08.2017 reported